Talk:Tiger shark/GA2
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: LittleJerry (talk) 23:25, 17 July 2011 (UTC) There are a few things to be done before this article can be passed for a GA stamp
- For the taxonomy section, either expand on it or simply remove the tag.
- Fix the prose problem for the section on its range and habitat.
- Make the article consistent with its use of "Tiger shark" vs "tiger shark". The biology sub-section has a few uses of "Tiger shark".
- Fix the links for citations 13, 14 and 29.
LittleJerry (talk) 23:25, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
All issues fixed. 1007D has been blocked, but I fixed the issues for him (and removed a dead link). By the way, I am a new user named Pop Goes the Decay. Does this article meet the GA criteria? Pass? Pop Goes the Decay (talk) 07:41, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- Hello. I'm not the official reviewer, but I thought I'd throw my 2 cents in. In the external links, there's no need to list links which are linked to elsewhere in the article. So the link to commons is given in a box in the side, the link to IUCN redlist is in a ref, etc. Those sort of links shouldn't also be in the external links section. (Also IUCN is in the refs twice; those should be combined.) In my opinion, the lede, "see also" section, images, and captions are all good. These are areas many articles have problems with, but they seem fine here. Hope my extra opinions are useful! All the best, – Quadell (talk) 12:05, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Okay, the original nominator has now been blocked indefinitely. I'll take over the nomination, and will make the changes listed above. – Quadell (talk) 14:59, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
1. Well written?:
- Prose quality:
- Manual of Style compliance:
2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:
- References to sources:
- Citations to reliable sources, where required:
- No original research:
3. Broad in coverage?:
- Major aspects:
- Focused:
4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:
- Fair representation without bias:
5. Reasonably stable?
- No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):
6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:
- Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
- Pass or Fail: LittleJerry (talk) 19:40, 18 July 2011 (UTC)