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

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b ( MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): 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, where possible and appropriate.

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

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments: This is another terrific article, very well done and interesting. I made a few minor tweaks for wording and punctuation, etc., just to help clarify. Again, nice nice work! Auntieruth55 ( talk) 17:19, 27 September 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the review!-- Jackyd101 ( talk) 19:17, 27 September 2009 (UTC) reply