Talk:Cetiosauriscus/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 06:06, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well-written:

The article possessed a handful of minor grammatical errors when I began this review, but nothing I was not able to fix. Aside from that it follows the policies on prose, content and structure, and with my modifications, grammar. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 14:35, 23 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 uses a sizable quantity of reliable, published sources. No original reasearch looks to have been incorporated, and the content is laden with frequent citations. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 14:34, 23 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 seems to cover all aspects of the topic which are relevant for encyclopedic inclusion. No irrelevant details appear to have been applied. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 14:32, 23 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.

The article does not demonstrate any bias towards or against its subject. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 14:31, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Looking at the edit history as far back as October, none of the editing which has occurred since then appears disruptive in any way. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 06:26, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The images are all validly licensed and do not violate any fair use-related laws. They also serve clear and relevant informative and illustrative purposes. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 06:29, 20 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 grammatical tweaks, I now feel this article satisfies the GA criteria. Congratulations! Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 14:36, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]