(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the
guide to layout
Well referenced
(b) it provides in-line citations from
reliable sources 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
Inline citations are appropriate, however certain sections contain paragraphs cited entirely by one source. While this is OK, you might consider duplicating the reference instead of just leaving it at the end if that paragraph cites specific details, such as birth dates and monitary figures as occurs in the "early life" section. Still, this is just advice for improvement, not a GA concern.
(c) it contains no original research
No indication of original research
Broad in its coverage
(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic
A well-covered subject, to the point of being a potential
FA candidate. Well done.
(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see
summary style).
The article goes into detail, but not inappropriately. The article can easily be followed by the reader.
Neutral
it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.
Article is very neutral and unbiased
Stable
it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing
edit war or content dispute.
(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable
captions
Images are relevant and useful, with captions
General comments
This is a well-written article, and a clear
featured article contender. The article is in-depth and well referenced and the prose is very clear. Very well done.
(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the
guide to layout
Well referenced
(b) it provides in-line citations from
reliable sources 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
Inline citations are appropriate, however certain sections contain paragraphs cited entirely by one source. While this is OK, you might consider duplicating the reference instead of just leaving it at the end if that paragraph cites specific details, such as birth dates and monitary figures as occurs in the "early life" section. Still, this is just advice for improvement, not a GA concern.
(c) it contains no original research
No indication of original research
Broad in its coverage
(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic
A well-covered subject, to the point of being a potential
FA candidate. Well done.
(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see
summary style).
The article goes into detail, but not inappropriately. The article can easily be followed by the reader.
Neutral
it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.
Article is very neutral and unbiased
Stable
it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing
edit war or content dispute.
(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable
captions
Images are relevant and useful, with captions
General comments
This is a well-written article, and a clear
featured article contender. The article is in-depth and well referenced and the prose is very clear. Very well done.