Talk:Telluride House

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Telluride House/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 18:37, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, I will be reviewing this against the GA criteria as part of a GAN sweep. I'll leave some comments soon. JAGUAR  18:37, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguations: No links found.

Linkrot: No linkrot found in this article.

Checking against the GA criteria[edit]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Some overlinking in the Notable Members section
    "A year later, it was placed on the Register" - you sure register needs to be capitalised here?
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    No original research found.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

This meets the criteria as it is well written, comprehensive for the subject and all of the sources check out. I couldn't find anything major enough to bring up JAGUAR  16:34, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]