Talk:The Hardest Day

	The Hardest Day has been listed as one of the Warfare 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.
Article milestones Date Process Result April 14, 2011 Peer review Reviewed April 19, 2011 Good article nominee Listed
	Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 18, 2017, and August 18, 2020.
Current status: Good article

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

Military history: Aviation / British / European / German / World War II This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles Associated task forces: /  Military aviation task force British military history task force European military history task force German military history task force World War II task force Aviation This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Hardest Day/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Harrison49 (talk) 12:50, 19 April 2011 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria[reply]

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

   The article is well written and maintains a good style.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

   References are well used and are reliable.A citation for the last paragraph of the Background section is needed.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   The article does not seem to be subject to edit warring.

6. 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:

   Images are used effectively and are in the public domain. Captions are used effectively.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Very well written and informative. Harrison49 (talk) 18:59, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]