# Talk:The Fox, the Wolf and the Husbandman

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Fox, the Wolf and the Husbandman/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Cirt (talk · contribs) 02:59, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
I will review this article. — Cirt (talk) 02:59, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Look forward to your comments. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 10:43, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good, it's 2nd on my list of pending reviews at the moment. :) Should get to it soon. — Cirt (talk) 12:41, 18 June 2013 (UTC)


### Good article nomination on hold
This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write.  This is how the article, as of June 24, 2013, compares against the  six good article criteria:

1. Well written?:
NOTE: Please respond below entire GA Review, and not interspersed throughout, thanks!
Writing quality is good.
Disciplina clericalis - redlink, not necessary, but would be nice if it were created, at least as a sourced stub.
Template:Henryson - lots of redlinks here, not required, but would be good if they were created, at least as referenced small articles.
2. Factually accurate?: Cite missing at end of sentence at end of Analysis sect.
3. Broad in coverage?: Analysis sect - can this be expanded upon in size and scope a bit?
4. Neutral point of view?: Neutral tone throughout.
5. Article stability? Upon inspection of article edit history and article talk page history going back over one month, no issues with stability.
6. Images?:
File:Dunfermline Abbey by John Slezer.jpg - image hosted on Wikimedia Commons, image page checks out okay.
File:William caxton.jpg - image hosted on Wikimedia Commons, missing author field. Also, appear to be problems with licensing tag section.
NOTE: Please respond below entire GA Review, and not interspersed throughout, thanks!Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved.  After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again.  If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice.  Thank you for your work so far. — Cirt (talk) 00:23, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Replaced second image, at fault, with another image.
Expanded on the Analysis section with an elaboration of a point and an example of Yamamoto's; also re-worded. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 15:19, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Stumbled on this and completed point #3 Eatmark (talk) 04:02, 28 June 2013 (UTC)Eatmark
Appreciate the work Eatmark. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 19:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)


#### Passed as GA
Passed as GA. Thanks for responsiveness to comments, above. — Cirt (talk) 21:22, 12 July 2013 (UTC)