2009 Palma Nova bombing 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 February 12, 2011 Good article nominee Listed
	A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on July 31, 2009.

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

Crime and Criminal Biography: Terrorism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Terrorism task force (assessed as Mid-importance). Spain Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain 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.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Who keeps on reverting my edits? I have removed the fact the bomb was near a tourist hotels as I believe it to be irrelevant, ETA has never directly targeted tourists. My edits have been replaced by just a bland summary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.41.21.24 (talk) 10:23, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your repeated attempts to add unattributed opinion go against WP:TERRORIST, which was pointed out to you on your talk page and in an edit summary. Other problems with your edits are that you repeatedly remove references, including one which sources a quote which has to be sourced. There is no such time as "20:00pm", and it is pointless for you to keep changing [[ETA]] to [[Euskadi Ta Askatasuna|Eta]] for two reasons. Firstly the article is at ETA, and secondly it is always capitalised. O Fenian (talk) 16:10, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:2009 Palma Nova bombing/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:56, 12 February 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:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

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:

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:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Looks good!--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:56, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]