Talk:Struthiosaurinae/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 07:23, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA criteria

Well-written:

I made a few tweaks to the text here and there, for reasons of grammar. With that done, I am confident that the article complies sufficiently with the policies on prose, structure and layout. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 08:09, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation

Verifiable with no original research:

The article has a healthy bibliography of reliable published sources, all of which it makes frequent and indicated use of. It doesn't look like there is any original research mixed into the lot, either. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 08:08, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline

(b) 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)

(c) it contains no original research

Broad in its coverage:

The article appears to cover all encyclopedically relevant aspects of the subject for which reputable information was available. It doesn't seem to contain any trivia or otherwise fluff. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 08:07, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Nothing resembling bias towards or against the subject is present in the article. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 08:05, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

The article has only existed since early December - which I find quite surprising, actually - so it has a relatively small list of revisions. None of the revisions indicate any edit warring or editing of a similar nature has taken place in all of its existence. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 07:28, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

The article is well-illustrated, and all images used are from the Wikimedia Commons, so no fair use violations are likely. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 07:26, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

With the above-mentioned modifications, I believe this article satisfies the GA criteria. Congratulations! :) Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 08:10, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]