Jump to content

Wikipedia:Good article criteria

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Marskell (talk | contribs) at 18:46, 28 September 2007 (they're still substantially similar). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Shortcut:
WP:WIAGA
WP:GA?
WP:GACR

A good article is a satisfactory article that has not met (or is unable to meet) the criteria for featured articles. The good article criteria measure decent articles; they are somewhat different from the featured article criteria, which determine our best articles.

What is a good article?

A good article has the following attributes:

  1. It is well written. In this respect:
    (a) the prose is clear and the grammar is correct; and
    (b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable. In this respect, it:
    (a) provides references to all sources of information, and at minimum contains a section dedicated to the attribution of those sources in accordance with the guide to layout;[2]
    (b) at minimum, 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;[2] and
    (c) contains no original research.
  3. It is broad in its coverage. In this respect, it:
    (a) addresses the major aspects of the topic;[3] and
    (b) stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary details (see summary style).
  4. It is neutral; that is, it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.
  5. It is stable; that is, it does not change significantly from day to day and is not the subject of an ongoing edit war. Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, and improvements based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply.[4]
  6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.[5] In this respect:
    (a) the images are appropriate to the subject, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status; and
    (b) non-free images meet the criteria for fair use images and are labeled accordingly.

What is not a good article?

Lists, portals, and images are not reviewed by the GA system; these items should be nominated for featured list, featured portal or featured picture status. Disambiguation pages and stubs in their current form cannot meet the good article criteria. Lastly, an article loses its good article status once it becomes featured.

Articles that appear to meet the featured article criteria should be listed at peer review and featured article candidates instead of good article nominations.

See also

Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles for a more detailed treatment on the mechanics of reviewing an article for GA status.

Notes

  1. ^ Although the entire Manual of Style should be followed, it is not completely necessary at this level.
  2. ^ a b Where in-line citations are provided, they should give proper attribution using either Harvard references or the cite.php footnotes method, but not both in the same article. Science-based articles should follow the Scientific citation guidelines.
  3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required by WP:FAC; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not necessarily outline every part of the topic, and broad overviews of large topics to be listed.
  4. ^ Nominations for articles that are unstable because of constructive editing should be placed on hold.
  5. ^ A lack of images does not disqualify the article from GA status.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Good_article_criteria&oldid=160966546"