Talk:Waterford Township, New Jersey/GA1

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   • The article has many short one sentence paragraphs.
   • External links should not be included in the prose.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to

   reliable sources): c (OR

   ):

   • There are large sections of the article that are unreferenced.
   • There are several dead links in the article, check the tool.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   • Why is the mayor missing from the infobox?
   • The lead is too short and does not provide an adequate summary of the article
   • Many sections, such as the Geography section, seem incomplete.
   • The article is missing many sections that make a complete article about a place, such as History, Climate, Crime, Economy, Arts ans Culture, and Notable residents. See Teaneck, New Jersey for an example of what this article should look like.

4. It follows the
   neutral point of view
   policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have

   suitable captions

   ):

   Some pictures of the township would be nice, but not required.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

The article has too many issues that would take more than a week to fix. In addition, it appears the nominator is not a major contributor to the article. Therefore, I will have to fail the article. The article may be renominated once all the issues are addressed. Dough4872 16:01, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]