From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer:
Tisquesusa (
talk ·
contribs)
03:41, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
reply
GA review – see
WP:WIAGA for criteria
Excellent complete article, definitely GA
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Well written, perfect prose, grammar good
- B. It complies with the
manual of style guidelines for
lead sections,
layout,
words to watch,
fiction, and
list incorporation:
- All very good
- 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:
- Sources are linked and accessible, also sources where no subscription is needed are available and kept up-to-date
- 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:
- Perfect
- C. It contains
no original research:
- No OR, just a good compilation of information that was already available but never this well summarised
- D. It contains no
copyright violations nor
plagiarism:
- Nope
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the
main aspects of the topic:
- Enough overview of the various themes
- B. It stays
focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see
summary style):
- And also enough detail in the chosen chapters
- Is it
neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- No issues
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing
edit war or content dispute:
- Nope
- 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:
- All ok
- B. Images are
relevant to the topic, and have
suitable captions:
- Added some relevant ones, could be more added, but that's a personal taste
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- No doubt; another excellent article by Jo-Jo Eumereus, well written, complete, detailed, heavily referenced, interesting and just good
- Hum. @
Tisquesusa: seems like the passing has not been registered.
Jo-Jo Eumerus (
talk,
contributions)
10:57, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
reply