Talk:Tupungatito

Tupungatito has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 23, 2022. (Reviewed version).

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in the following regions may be able to help:
Argentina	Chile

The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Argentina Low‑importance

	Argentina portal This article is part of WikiProject Argentina, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to Argentina. If you would like to participate, you can improve Tupungatito, or sign up and contribute to a wider array of articles like those on our to do list.ArgentinaWikipedia:WikiProject ArgentinaTemplate:WikiProject ArgentinaArgentine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chile Low‑importance

	Chile portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chile, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chile on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChileWikipedia:WikiProject ChileTemplate:WikiProject ChileChile articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Volcanoes Mid‑importance

	Volcanoes portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Volcanoes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of volcanoes, volcanology, igneous petrology, and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VolcanoesWikipedia:WikiProject VolcanoesTemplate:WikiProject VolcanoesWikiProject Volcanoes articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mountains Low‑importance

	Mountains portal This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Geography Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Geography To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations
Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles.
Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention
Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions
Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country
Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes
Map : See Wikipedia requested maps
Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability
Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places
Stubs : See Geography stubs

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tupungatito/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ganesha811 (talk · contribs) 21:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: this article now passes GA. Congrats to you and everyone else who worked on it. Ganesha811 (talk) 21:07, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.	Pass - made tweaks myself - if you'd like to discuss any, let me know.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Pass, no issues.
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.	Pass, no issues.
	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).	Sources are of high quality without exception. Pass.
	2c. it contains no original research.	None found, pass.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Nothing found by Earwig or manual spot check.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Nothing else found significant - comprehensive. Pass.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Pass after some minor tweaks.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	No issues, pass.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Pass, no issues.
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.	Pass, no issues. Only one image.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	The caption is a bit too long - recommended shortening it by at least 25%. Did some shortening. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:29, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
	7. Overall assessment.