The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline;
(b)
reliable sources are
cited inline. All content that
could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2]
^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the
Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
^This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of
featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
^Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as
copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
^Other media, such as video and
sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
^The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
Review
Well-written:
Criteria
Notes
Result
(a) (prose)
Seems to have a little bit of science-y talk, but not too technical
Pass
(b) (MoS)
See prior, no glaring issues, needs a few more wiki-links maybe, but not fail-able over something as small as that.
No problems I can see, although the one maybe reference is used in a appropriate way.
Pass
(c) (original research)
No original research detected
Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)
Earwigs not detecting anything
Pass
Broad in its coverage:
Criteria
Notes
Result
(a) (major aspects)
Despite being a little recent, covers major aspects.
Pass
(b) (focused)
Yes, no problems I can see
Pass
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Notes
Result
Its an article about a snake, how can it have an opinion? its fine.
Pass
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing
edit war or content dispute.
Notes
Result
No edit wars.
Pass
Illustrated, if possible, by media such as
images,
video, or
audio:
Criteria
Notes
Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)
The reviewer has left no comments here
Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)
The reviewer has left no comments here
Pass
Result
Result
Notes
Pass
Good job! Nothing I really can think of saying here.
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline;
(b)
reliable sources are
cited inline. All content that
could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2]
^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the
Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
^This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of
featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
^Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as
copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
^Other media, such as video and
sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
^The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
Review
Well-written:
Criteria
Notes
Result
(a) (prose)
Seems to have a little bit of science-y talk, but not too technical
Pass
(b) (MoS)
See prior, no glaring issues, needs a few more wiki-links maybe, but not fail-able over something as small as that.
No problems I can see, although the one maybe reference is used in a appropriate way.
Pass
(c) (original research)
No original research detected
Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)
Earwigs not detecting anything
Pass
Broad in its coverage:
Criteria
Notes
Result
(a) (major aspects)
Despite being a little recent, covers major aspects.
Pass
(b) (focused)
Yes, no problems I can see
Pass
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Notes
Result
Its an article about a snake, how can it have an opinion? its fine.
Pass
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing
edit war or content dispute.
Notes
Result
No edit wars.
Pass
Illustrated, if possible, by media such as
images,
video, or
audio:
Criteria
Notes
Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)
The reviewer has left no comments here
Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)
The reviewer has left no comments here
Pass
Result
Result
Notes
Pass
Good job! Nothing I really can think of saying here.
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.