Talk:Leuschner Observatory/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Plarem (talk · contribs) 20:47, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria[edit]

Good Article Status - Review Criteria
Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

  1. Well-written:
    2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. (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] and
    (c) it contains no original research.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. [4]
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. [5]
    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]

Review[edit]

  1. Well-written:
    2. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose)
    1. A well written article, one MoS problem (listed below).
    		 Pass Pass
    (b) (MoS)
    1. Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 6 Meter, use 6 Meter, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 6 Meter. checkYResolved
    		 Fail Fail
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references)
    1. For all this section: An adequately referenced article, with reliable sources and no original research.
    		 Pass Pass
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) See above. Pass Pass
    (c) (original research) See above. Pass Pass
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects)
    1. Article has all the major aspects and is focused on the subject.
    		 Pass Pass
    (b) (focused) See above. Pass Pass
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
    5. Notes Result
    1. The article represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.
    		 Pass Pass
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. Notes Result
    1. The article is stable: It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    		 Pass Pass
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)
    1. If it is possible, this is not a GA Requirement, please find a free use image for the infobox.
    		 Pass Pass

Result[edit]

Result Notes
Pass Pass MoS issue needs to be finished, and then I will give an 'aye' for this article! Well done! Passed!

Discussion[edit]

Please ask questions if there is a need for that. – Plarem (User talk contribs) 20:10, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One MoS issue, and then a pass! – Plarem (User talk contribs) 20:10, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the units of measurement, I had imperfectly followed the convention for measurements used as adjectives (MOS:HYPHEN). I think it is all now consistent in using hyphens. James McBride (talk) 18:59, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, I did not read that part of the WP:MOS.

PASS —Pass Pass–Well done on bringing Leuschner Observatory to be a Good Article! – Plarem (User talk contribs) 19:37, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Notes[edit]

  1. ^ 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.
  2. ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
  3. ^ 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.
  4. ^ 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.
  5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  6. ^ 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Leuschner_Observatory/GA1&oldid=1038141138"