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

Reviewer: Zwerg Nase ( talk · contribs) 17:13, 16 March 2015 (UTC) reply

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b ( MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a ( reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c ( OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a ( major aspects): b ( focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b ( appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

While the article could be more detailed in order to go to FAN, it is completely in line with GA standards. I am gladly promoting it. Good work! Zwerg Nase ( talk) 18:44, 23 March 2015 (UTC) reply