GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Jaguar ( talk · contribs) 19:21, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
I'll leave some initial comments under 24 hours and will mainly focus on copy editing issues. Thanks! ☠
Jag
uar ☠ 19:21, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
The images meet the GA criteria.
This article has an appropriate reference section and no dead links, so this meets the GA criteria.
This is a neat and compact article. The only problems I found with it some minor, confusing prose issues but other than that most of the article meets the GA criteria. Images are good, the references meet the GA criteria, the lead and reception sections both meet the GA criteria. I'll put this on hold for the standard seven days even thought it doesn't need it! ☠ Jag uar ☠ 19:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for addressing all of those points so swiftly. I think the lead looks fine the way it is, and everything else has also been clarified. I don't know what else there is - this whole article meets the GA criteria as it's prose is also excellent. Well done on another GA! ☠ Jag uar ☠ 12:42, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Jaguar ( talk · contribs) 19:21, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
I'll leave some initial comments under 24 hours and will mainly focus on copy editing issues. Thanks! ☠
Jag
uar ☠ 19:21, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
The images meet the GA criteria.
This article has an appropriate reference section and no dead links, so this meets the GA criteria.
This is a neat and compact article. The only problems I found with it some minor, confusing prose issues but other than that most of the article meets the GA criteria. Images are good, the references meet the GA criteria, the lead and reception sections both meet the GA criteria. I'll put this on hold for the standard seven days even thought it doesn't need it! ☠ Jag uar ☠ 19:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for addressing all of those points so swiftly. I think the lead looks fine the way it is, and everything else has also been clarified. I don't know what else there is - this whole article meets the GA criteria as it's prose is also excellent. Well done on another GA! ☠ Jag uar ☠ 12:42, 18 June 2014 (UTC)