Talk:Nevadaplano/GA1
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Ganesha811 (talk · contribs) 21:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi! I'll be reviewing this article, using the template below. I hope to complete the review over the next week. Ganesha811 (talk) 21:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. |
|
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. |
|
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. |
|
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). |
|
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. |
|
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. |
|
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. |
|
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). |
|
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. |
|
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. |
|
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. |
|
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. |
I think we can still provide some illustrations for the article. File:Shallow subduction Laramide orogeny.png can be used when discussing the two orogenys in the Geologic history section. File:Altiplano.jpg could be used in the lead, with a caption that mentions that the Nevadaplano was a high-altitude plain similar in nature to the contemporary Altiplano. File:Caras de Piedra.jpg could be used in a similar fashion if you prefer it. File:Romanceor Altiplano 4.jpg is a good third option. File:Ignimbrite.jpg or similar could be used to accompany the mention of ignimbrites. An image of the Sierra Nevada may also be good where they are mentioned in the body as constituting a boundary for the Nevadaplano.
|
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. |
- @Ganesha811:Is this review complete? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 19:10, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Jo-Jo Eumerus: no it is not yet, but I expect it to be tomorrow. Ganesha811 (talk) 04:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Jo-Jo Eumerus: the review is now complete, with one outstanding issue - illustration. I've made some suggestions for potential images. Ganesha811 (talk) 20:15, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Jo-Jo Eumerus: This article now passes GA. Congrats to you and anyone else who worked on it. Ganesha811 (talk) 21:26, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Jo-Jo Eumerus: the review is now complete, with one outstanding issue - illustration. I've made some suggestions for potential images. Ganesha811 (talk) 20:15, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Jo-Jo Eumerus: no it is not yet, but I expect it to be tomorrow. Ganesha811 (talk) 04:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)