From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Article (edit | visual edit | history ) · Article talk (edit | history ) · Watch
Reviewer: Oakley77 (talk · contribs ) 15:29, 22 May 2012 (UTC) [ reply ]
Well-written :
Criteria
Notes
Result
(a) (prose)
Great here
✓ Pass
(b) (MoS)
As is here...
✓ Pass
Verifiable with no original research :
Criteria
Notes
Result
(a) (references)
Yes
✓ Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)
Not enough
(c) (original research)
Surefire pass
✓ Pass
Broad in its coverage :
Criteria
Notes
Result
(a) (major aspects)
covered greatly
✓ Pass
(b) (focused)
Semi-focused, needs some directional change
Neutral : it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Stable : it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
Notes
Result
Stable indeed
✓ Pass
Illustrated , if possible, by media such as images , video , or audio :
Criteria
Notes
Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)
Yes, but there is more images needed
✗ Fail
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)
pass
✓ Pass
Result
Notes
✗ Fail
Just not up to snuff here, too bad.
I will be reviewing this for a bit, but during that time, please feel free to comment and help make this article a GA article. I also will be completing the review at intervals, so if you see the review half-done, be aware it will be completed soon. Thanks for the comments and input! I will also try to make this review as concise and clear as possible! Thanks!Oakley77 (talk ) 15:29, 22 May 2012 (UTC) [ reply ]
Are you actually going to provide things to fix on this one, or will it be an auto-pass without noting anything like the rest of your reviews? Wizardman Operation Big Bear 17:44, 23 May 2012 (UTC) [ reply ]