Talk:Kootenay Lake/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Bernstein2291 (Talk • Contributions • Sign Here) 17:27, 4 March 2011 (UTC) I've reviewed the article and here are my comments.
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- I like your references, but there needs to be references for first three sentences of Dikes and Dams, as well as the Settlements around the lake.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- it isn't long enough. There needs to be more information about the lake, especially the history. You could merge the sections about Pollution and Dams and the second paragraph of Fauna into the history section if you wanted to.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- There are not enough photographs. Though if the text is improved, photographs wouldn't be essential.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- I'm going to put this on hold for around a week. If it doesn't qualify for a GA by then, I'm going to fail it.
- Pass/Fail:
I'm going to fail it for now. I hope this article will be improved soon. Bernstein2291 (Talk • Contributions • Sign Here) 03:30, 5 March 2011 (UTC)