# Talk:Pat Seerey

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pat Seerey/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jonas Vinther (talk · contribs) 13:45, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Article looks pretty stable. I'll review it shortly. Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 13:45, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Well-written 
a. the prose is clear and concise, it respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct
b. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation

The article is excellently written with one or two tiny errors which I have fixed as I read the article through.
Verifiable with no original research 
a. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline
b. It provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines
c. It contains no original research

The sources used in this article are acceptable and contain the necessary information.
Broad in its coverage 
a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic
b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail

The article is very broad in its coverage, stays on topic and does not go into unnecessary detail.
Neutral 
It represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each

The article is neutral and does not included personal opinions or statements.
Stable 
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute

The article is mainly written by one major contributor and the content does not significantly change from day to day (edits made in preparation for the GA-nomination will be ignored). It's also stable no edit wars or disputes.
Illustrated 
a. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content
b. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

The article is illustrated with one image in the infobox which is uploaded and from Commons and is a public domain.
Pass, fail or hold? 
This article meets all the GA-requirements and I'm therefore going to pass it. Excellent job. :) Jonas Vinther (speak to me!) 14:05, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Pat Seerey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140407062837/http://www.arkansaspreservation.com/historic-properties/_search_nomination_popup.aspx?id=271 to http://www.arkansaspreservation.com/historic-properties/_search_nomination_popup.aspx?id=271
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:52, 14 December 2017 (UTC)