# Talk:East Worldham

This review is transcluded from Talk:East Worldham/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Thine Antique Pen (talk · contribs) 16:41, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Well, lets review this then!

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Well, Dr. Blofeld, seems to be another good job!