From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


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

Nominator: Epicgenius ( talk · contribs) 16:24, 6 April 2024 (UTC) reply

Reviewer: Arconning ( talk · contribs) 16:53, 6 July 2024 (UTC) reply

I will be reviewing this, comments will probably be finished in the next 72 hours! Arconning ( talk) 16:53, 6 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Epicgenius Here are my comments, hope they can be addressed. :) Arconning ( talk) 12:36, 8 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Prose and MoS

Lead and infobox

Site

  • No issues.

Architecture

Development to Recent years

Post-closure

Impact

Images

  • Images have proper licenses and are relevant to the article.

Refs

  • Earwig's okay!
  • Random ref check: 1, 2, 6, 10, 12, 15, 17, 20, 25, 36, 48, 56, 71, 85, 96, 104. All good.

Misc

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed