# Talk:Wallachian Revolution of 1848

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality: 

B. MoS compliance: 

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: 

Hmm, military history. Something I've never really reviewed or looked at before. However, I must say it looks good and should be of Featured quality in a short time. By all means, try for Featured Article Candidates. This article does pass Good Article quality as it meets the requirements.Mitch32contribs 23:24, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone have english data about this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edipqe (talk • contribs) 11:57, 16 March 2009 (UTC) 

I have already answered on another page, so please stay focused. I also see absolutely no sense in having this discussion here - neither the controversy nor the sources have any relevancy on this page. Dahn (talk) 12:03, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand. Where do they have relevancy then, if not on this page? --131.188.3.21 (talk) 18:07, 9 May 2009 (UTC)