My way of reviewing WP:GAN's is to read through the article once and then go through it again in more detail, starting at the first section going through to the end and then reviewing the WP:Lead last.
The first statement that caught my eye was in the WP:Lead: "During the time it was observed by the spacecraft, the planet's orbit, which lasts on average approximately 38 days, shortened by 39 minutes every "year" because of this effect." and I flagged that as a possible "grammar problem". Was Kepler-9c watched for one year, or should it have read "...shortened by an average of 39 minutes per year because of this effect"?
I've now decided that the sentence contains a "clever play" on words, its not an (earth) year of 365.25 days, its the time taken to orbit Kepler-9 (a "year"). I will award GA status once this point is properly addressed. Pyrotec (talk) 14:08, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
A short but well referenced article on Kepler-9c.
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- Pass or Fail: