Jump to content

Talk:Archaeoastronomy/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 09:53, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: Three found and fixed.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 10:03, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Linkrot: One found and tagged.[2] Jezhotwells (talk) 10:13, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I shall now read the article thoroughly and post a review here within the next twenty-four hours. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:13, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria

[edit]
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Well written and organised.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Ref# 81 is a dead link. I can't find any manuals on the Brunton web site. Done
    Fixed with Internet Archive / Alun Salt (talk) 15:16, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Good, that didn't work for me. Results from the Ia are sometimes inconsistent. All other references are RS, assume good faith for off-line sources. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:56, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Thorough, without going into unnecessary micro-detail.
  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):
    Captioned and licensed appropriately
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    An interesting and well written article. I am happy to list this as GA. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 15:56, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]