Talk:Geastrum pectinatum/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Hi, this is a good article, as it meets all the GA criteria. I altered one wikilink, relinking it to another word, as it redirected to the opposite meaning. That's it! —Mattisse (Talk) 20:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): The article is very well written in prose that takes some concentration but given that, it is clear. b (MoS): Follows MoS

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable c (OR): No OR

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): Covers all the major areas b (focused): Remains focused on the topic

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias: Neutral

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.: Stable

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:

This is an excellent article on the subject. Congratulations!

—Mattisse (Talk) 20:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC)