Jump to content

Talk:Eurasian crag martin/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: Redtigerxyz Talk 16:21, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  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):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  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):
    Good and relevant illustrations
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
  • Please format the references uniformly, at some places: "p./pp." is used (ref 20), at others (ref 16-7) ": 660–661".
  • I think it's mos for books to use p/pp and journals left bare. Certainly the citebook template displays pages with p/pp, and citejournal doesn't. However one book ref was missing pp, and one was badly formatted, fixed now
  • Ref 18 does not date of publication.
  • Added December 2007 (most recent available)
  • All references should have title, author, publisher, date of publication, pages (if applicable).
  • I think I've added missing publishers now

--Redtigerxyz Talk 16:30, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]