GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar):

Comment: The article is neatly disccused for neutral views of encyclopedic aspect for this feature. b ( MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): Comment: I think this article is summarized for unusual points of shaggy and disploted description at the beginning or start-point of this page. Well, it should be pass instead

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a ( reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c ( OR): d ( copyvio and plagiarism):

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 non-free use rationales): b ( appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: