Talk:Dhaka Residential Model College/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Nasty Housecat (talk) 04:46, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I have reviewed the article and my comments are below.
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
This article is strong in many respects but suffers from poor quality prose.
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- As previous reviewers have noted, the quality of the prose is very rough. There are serious grammatical mistakes throughout. The article needs a thorough edit by someone more fluent in written English. You might try WP:GOCE. The project itself is no longer active, but some of the editors listed there are still active and might be willing to help if you ask them.
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- The article meets the MOS standard for a GA
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
- 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):
- The article is well referenced
- C. It contains no original research:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- Nice use of images to illustrate the article
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- This is a thorough and well-researched article that in my view is close to the GA standard, but suffers from a low quality of prose that unfortunately prevents it from passing. A lot of work is needed on the writing before the quality would be up to the required standard. You have obviously put a lot of work into the piece. I hope you will obtain some help in copy editing and renominate the article once rewritten.
- Pass or Fail:
