Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
add link to WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE |
removed requirement to be "Factually accurate", there is no such policy |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
-->|1b=it complies with the [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|manual of style]] guidelines for [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lead section)|lead sections]], [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (layout)|layout]], [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (words to watch)|words to watch]], [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)|fiction]], and [[Wikipedia:Embedded list|list incorporation]]<!-- |
-->|1b=it complies with the [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|manual of style]] guidelines for [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lead section)|lead sections]], [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (layout)|layout]], [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (words to watch)|words to watch]], [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)|fiction]], and [[Wikipedia:Embedded list|list incorporation]]<!-- |
||
-->|2= |
-->|2='''[[Wikipedia:Verifiability|Verifiable]]''' with '''no original research''' <!-- |
||
-->|2a=it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with [[WP:FNNR|the layout style guideline]]<!-- |
-->|2a=it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with [[WP:FNNR|the layout style guideline]]<!-- |
||
-->|2b=it provides [[WP:Inline citation|in-line citations]] from [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or [[Wikipedia:Likely to be challenged|likely to be challenged]], and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the [[Wikipedia:Scientific citation guidelines|scientific citation guidelines]]<!-- |
-->|2b=it provides [[WP:Inline citation|in-line citations]] from [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or [[Wikipedia:Likely to be challenged|likely to be challenged]], and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the [[Wikipedia:Scientific citation guidelines|scientific citation guidelines]]<!-- |
||
Revision as of 02:21, 7 January 2013
Example:
{{WP:Good article criteria/WIAGA|6a}}yields
images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content
| 1 | Well-written |
| 1a | the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct |
| 1b | it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation |
| 2 | Verifiable with no original research |
| 2a | it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline |
| 2b | it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines |
| 2c | it contains no original research |
| 3 | Broad in its coverage |
| 3a | it addresses the main aspects of the topic |
| 3b | it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style) |
| 4 | Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without 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 | Illustrated, if possible, by images |
| 6a | images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content |
| 6b | images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions |