Talk:Cultivar/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 22:38, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.
Disambiguations: One found and fixed.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 22:46, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:47, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Checking against GA criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- Referenced well to RS, no evidence of OR
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- Thorough without unnecessary minutiae.
- a (major aspects):
- 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):
- Licensed and captioned OK.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- An interesting, well written article. I am happy to list this as a GA. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 23:08, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail: