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

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b ( MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c ( OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Nice article. Easily meets the GA requirements. I only saw a few minor issues that I went ahead and corrected. Good job! — Bellhalla ( talk) 19:41, 2 April 2009 (UTC) reply

Thanks a lot for your review, Bellhalla! Parsecboy ( talk) 20:11, 2 April 2009 (UTC) reply