Talk:Object permanence/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: TamaraHamilton (talk · contribs) 02:16, 29 November 2011 (UTC) I feel that this is very informative article that deserves Good Article status.

• I disagree with your conclusion and I am implementing an Individual reassessment per Wikipedia:Good article reassessment. This article currently fails Wikipedia:Good article criteria 2b " Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article." This article has two types of referencing formats. It also fails Criteria 2a " it provides references to all sources of information". The "References" section is missing information related to "Uzgiris and Hunt" and "Wright". As such, I have delisted the article. If the references are fixed, it can be re-nominated or anyone can appeal my conclusions using a community reassessment at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment. maclean (talk) 06:12, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

This is a very well written article and fits the good article criteria. now that the references have been fixed.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

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):

   This article is mostly focused.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   There has been some major editing that has been going on with this page, but I feel that it has improved it enough to be looked at again as a good article.

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):

   There are no pictures on this page, but I feel that there are none that would add to the credibility of the page.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Overall I feel that this a good article and deserves to be recognized as such. I apologize for my first attempt at reviewing this article, but I feel that I have learned a lot through it as it is my first review.