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

Beginning review against Good article criteria. Qrsdogg ( talk) 20:23, 13 April 2011 (UTC) reply
Disambiguation pages: fixed one. Qrsdogg ( talk) 20:29, 13 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Links: links are fine. Qrsdogg ( talk) 20:29, 13 April 2011 (UTC) reply

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b ( MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

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: I don't see anything to disqualify this article. Qrsdogg ( talk) 20:45, 13 April 2011 (UTC) reply