Talk:Group 4 element/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 13:25, 3 April 2010 (UTC) I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   I made some copy-edits to correct spelling and grammar and improve clarity.

   Lead: Unpentquadium is mentioned in the lead but not in the body of the article. WP:LEAD says: "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article." There is also a stray sentence at the end of the lead. Please reorganise to consolidate this into a paragraph, two paragraphs would be sufficient for an article of this length. And add some information about Unpentquadium to the History section, explaining its theoretical existence.  Done

   I have reorganized and partially rewritten the lead paragraphs. I have also added some information about Unpentquadium.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   References check out, I fixed two dead links.

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:

   An excellent article, reminded me of my secondary school chemistry. Just the lead section to be fixed. On hold for seven days. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 14:03, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

   I believe the lead section is better organized now. Thanks for reviewing the article. Regards, —Terrence and Phillip 14:59, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

   Thanks for your rapid response. I ma happy to pass this as a Good Article. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 15:12, 3 April 2010 (UTC)