From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 00:28, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Quick failed because many paragraphs are entirely unreferenced.

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail: