Login
Login

Talk:Tet Offensive/GA1

GA Review

{{Good article tools}}

{{al|{{#titleparts:Tet Offensive/GA1|-1}}|noname=yes}}
:This review is transcluded from Talk:Tet Offensive/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Interchange88 ☢ 13:03, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

  1. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|1}}:

    2. :(a) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|1a}}; and {{done}}

    :(b) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|1b}}. {{done}} Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage, is not required for good articles.

  2. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2}}:

    3. :(a) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2a}};{{done}}

    :(b) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2b}};{{done}}Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article. and

    :(c) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2c}}.{{done}}

  3. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|3}}:{{done}}

    4. :(a) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|3a}};{{done}}This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics. and

    :(b) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|3b}}.{{done}}

  4. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|4}}.{{done}}

  5. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|5}}.{{done}}
    6. Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of constructive editing should be placed on hold.

  6. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|6}}:{{done}}
    7. Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.

    :(a) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|6a}}; and {{done}}

    :(b) {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|6b}}.{{done}}The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

This is an excellent, well-developed article, certainly deserving of GA status. The only thing I might add is that it may be too well-developed, and is slightly too long. Maybe some of the content can be moved into separate articles.