From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Michael Jester ( talk · contribs) 02:02, 9 December 2012 (UTC) reply

I will be reviewing this article. Comments will come within the hour. Looking forward to working with you.
Michael Jester ( talk · contribs) 02:02, 9 December 2012 (UTC) reply

Thanks!-- Astros4477 ( talk) 02:07, 9 December 2012 (UTC) reply
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b ( MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c ( OR):
  1. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  • Fine.
  1. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  • Neutral.
  1. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  • Stable.
  1. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  • All images look fine.
  1. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Once these comments are addressed, I will re-evaluate the article.
Michael Jester ( talk · contribs) 02:45, 9 December 2012 (UTC) reply

I have addressed all your comments.-- Astros4477 ( talk) 05:15, 9 December 2012 (UTC) reply
Thanks for being quick with addressing. I will look over the article again, and I will give you an answer in about an hour or two.
Michael Jester ( talk · contribs) 06:32, 9 December 2012 (UTC) reply