From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Article (
|
visual edit |
history ) ·
Article talk (
|
history ) ·
Watch
Reviewer:
Jackdude101 (
talk ·
contribs )
18:53, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
reply
GA review – see
WP:WIAGA for criteria
Passes the threshold "immediate failure" criteria: no cleanup banners, no obvious copyright infringements, etc.
Jackdude 101
talk
cont
18:21, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
reply
Is it well written ?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
Sticks to the well-sourced facts.
B. It complies with the
manual of style guidelines for
lead sections ,
layout ,
words to watch ,
fiction , and
list incorporation :
Is it
verifiable with no original research ?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline :
There is a citation error in the fourth reference.
Jackdude 101
talk
cont
18:53, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
reply
B. All
in-line citations are from
reliable sources , including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or
likely to be challenged , and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the
scientific citation guidelines :
C. It contains
no original research :
D. It contains no
copyright violations nor
plagiarism :
Is it broad in its coverage ?
A. It addresses the
main aspects of the topic:
B. It stays
focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see
summary style ):
Is it
neutral ?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable ?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing
edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by
images ?
A. Images are
tagged with their
copyright status , and
valid fair use rationales are provided for
non-free content :
B. Images are
relevant to the topic, and have
suitable captions :
Overall :
Pass or Fail:
@
Floydian : This article is a short-and-sweet affair, and is ship-shape overall. Address the item above to get the review passed.
Jackdude 101
talk
cont
18:53, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
reply
All fixed! -
Floydian
τ
¢
19:27, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
reply
@
Floydian : Great! Review passed.
Jackdude 101
talk
cont
20:27, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
reply
The discussion above 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.