Talk:Ramblin' Wreck from Georgia Tech/GA1

{{al|{{#titleparts:Ramblin' Wreck from Georgia Tech/GA1|-1}}|noname=yes}}
:This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Ramblin' Wreck from Georgia Tech/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

:GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.
2. :a (prose): {{GAList/check|y}} b (MoS): {{GAList/check|y}}
3. ::
4. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
5. :a (references): {{GAList/check|y}} b (citations to reliable sources): {{GAList/check|y}} c (OR): {{GAList/check|y}}
6. :: Two citation needed tags are outstanding from July 2009 {{done}}
7. It is broad in its coverage.
8. :a (major aspects): {{GAList/check|y}} b (focused): {{GAList/check|y}}
9. ::
10. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
11. :Fair representation without bias: {{GAList/check|y}}
12. ::
13. It is stable.
14. :No edit wars, etc.: {{GAList/check|y}}
15. ::
16. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
17. :a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): {{GAList/check|y}} b (appropriate use with suitable captions): {{GAList/check|y}}
18. ::
19. Overall:
20. :Pass/Fail: {{GAList/check|y}}
21. :Just 2 citation needed tags need addressing. On hold for seven days, major contributors and projects will be notified. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:49, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
22. ::

Looked for sources and couldn't find them, so removed the statements. Technically this fixes the issue. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:52, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

:OK, that is good enough for me, keep GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 04:09, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

::Sorry that I wasn't able to take care of this earlier. It looks like Wizardman did what I would have done, given that we can't find sources for those things. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 17:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC)