Jump to content

Talk:Copper shark/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Redtigerxyz Talk 06:05, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Congrats. It's a GA PASS. A very nice read indeed, well on the path of FA. I suggest a peer review by "expert" editors, who edit in this domain before a FAC. --Redtigerxyz Talk 13:08, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -- Yzx (talk) 17:30, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]