Jump to content

Talk:Reigomys/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: Airplaneman 18:41, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    Prose flows quite well, terms linked/described adequately (thanks, WP:POPUPS). Airplaneman 18:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Good here. Airplaneman 18:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Yes. Airplaneman 18:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  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):
    Well, no images are used, but I understand they are either nonexistent, copyrighted or extremely hard to find. Airplaneman 18:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Yes, definitely GA status. For FA, I would recommend getting hold of some pictures (if possible). Airplaneman 18:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]