From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dom497 ( talk · contribs) 23:46, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    See comment section below. Good.
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    See comment section below. Good.
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Pass!-- Dom497 ( talk) 19:28, 19 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Comments

These are the things that need to be fixed. The quality of the article (as in the way it is written) is very good. The article will be on hold for 7 days.-- Dom497 ( talk) 20:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC) reply

I have fixed everything.-- Astros4477 ( talk) 21:01, 17 July 2012 (UTC) reply
I have passed the article.-- Dom497 ( talk) 19:28, 19 July 2012 (UTC) reply
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dom497 ( talk · contribs) 23:46, 16 July 2012 (UTC) reply

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    See comment section below. Good.
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    See comment section below. Good.
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Pass!-- Dom497 ( talk) 19:28, 19 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Comments

These are the things that need to be fixed. The quality of the article (as in the way it is written) is very good. The article will be on hold for 7 days.-- Dom497 ( talk) 20:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC) reply

I have fixed everything.-- Astros4477 ( talk) 21:01, 17 July 2012 (UTC) reply
I have passed the article.-- Dom497 ( talk) 19:28, 19 July 2012 (UTC) reply

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook