Jump to content

Talk:Project A119/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: Astrocog (talk contribs count) 00:24, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Review in progress.AstroCog (talk) 00:24, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Nice article overall. Does what it needs to do.

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Good writing overall. Prose gets to the point.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Plenty of reliable references, well cited.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    No problems here.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    No problems here.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    Seems fairly stable.
  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):
    It's got images. Not sure what other images could improve the article.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    This one was pretty easy. After reading