Talk:Leopard catshark/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Xtzou (Talk) 19:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- Very well done and nicely illustrated. (Is that the editor's hand in the infobox picture? Xtzou (Talk) 19:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
Clear, concise wording
- B. MoS compliance: Complies with the required MoS elements
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources: Reliable sources
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: Well referenced
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects: Sets the context
- B. Focused: Remains focused on the subject
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail: Pass!
- Pass or Fail: Pass!
Congratulations! Xtzou (Talk) 19:51, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! And no, that is not my hand in the image. -- Yzx (talk) 23:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)