Talk:Hamdog/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Joe Gazz84user•talk•contribs•Editor Review 22:17, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Initial Review
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
- This article lacks almost every element in a good article. There are almost zero illustrations, there is no detail in the article and does not ever focus in at a single point on an topic. Below are a complete list of issues:
- No illustrations
- Article never focuses in on a concept
- Article has many short basic paragraphs
- Misuse of capital letters
- Lacks references
- Lacks complete sentences
I would recommend re-reading the criteria for good article status and re-submitting at a later time. Joe Gazz84user•talk•contribs•Editor Review 22:46, 25 August 2010 (UTC)