Talk:Eurasian crag martin/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:21, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

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):

   Good and relevant illustrations

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

• Please format the references uniformly, at some places: "p./pp." is used (ref 20), at others (ref 16-7) ": 660–661".

• I think it's mos for books to use p/pp and journals left bare. Certainly the citebook template displays pages with p/pp, and citejournal doesn't. However one book ref was missing pp, and one was badly formatted, fixed now

• Ref 18 does not date of publication.

• Added December 2007 (most recent available)

• All references should have title, author, publisher, date of publication, pages (if applicable).

• I think I've added missing publishers now

--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:30, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks for reviewing, let me know if I missed anything, or if there are other problems Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:53, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

• GA PASS --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 09:28, 11 April 2010 (UTC)