# Talk:2009 Palma Nova bombing

Who keeps on reverting my edits? I have removed the fact the bomb was near a tourist hotels as I believe it to be irrelevant, ETA has never directly targeted tourists. My edits have been replaced by just a bland summary.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.41.21.24 (talk) 10:23, 3 August 2009 (UTC) 

Your repeated attempts to add unattributed opinion go against WP:TERRORIST, which was pointed out to you on your talk page and in an edit summary. Other problems with your edits are that you repeatedly remove references, including one which sources a quote which has to be sourced. There is no such time as "20:00pm", and it is pointless for you to keep changing [[ETA]] to [[Euskadi Ta Askatasuna|Eta]] for two reasons. Firstly the article is at ETA, and secondly it is always capitalised. O Fenian (talk) 16:10, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:2009 Palma Nova bombing/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:56, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality: 

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: 

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources: 

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: 

C. No original research: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects: 

B. Focused: 

Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias: 

Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 

Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: 

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 

Looks good!--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:56, 12 February 2011 (UTC)