# Talk:SeaCity Museum

This article should not be speedy deleted as having no substantive content, because... (your reason here) --92.26.106.89 (talk) 22:31, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
people have a right to see this in relation to the RMS titanic

The page needed some content. I've added some text and a few references. Feel free to expand the article. Kind regards, --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:24, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:SeaCity Museum/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 08:26, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

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: