Talk:Andriamasinavalona

Andriamasinavalona has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: October 28, 2013. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Royalty and Nobility This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as Low-importance). Africa: Madagascar Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Madagascar (assessed as High-importance).

This review is

transcluded from Talk:Andriamasinavalona/GA1

. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 02:09, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be glad to take this one--thanks as always for your great contributions. Initial comments to follow in the next 1-3 days, depending on how the baseball World Series is progressing... -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:09, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This looks excellent; the only work left to be done is an image that needs proper tagging. Thanks again for all your work on this! -- Khazar2 (talk) 09:12, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for reviewing this, Khazar! I've added the copyright tags on the images and made a couple of other fixes. Let me know if you find anything else that needs my attention.

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the list incorporation .
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline .
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as audio :
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	[:File:Ambohidratrimo Madagascar 1901 view from east.jpg]] needs tag for US copyright status (since that's where WMF servers are)
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions .
	7. Overall assessment.	Pass as GA