Talk:Reigomys/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Airplaneman ✈ 18:41, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
Prose flows quite well, terms linked/described adequately (thanks, WP:POPUPS). Airplaneman ✈ 18:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Good here. Airplaneman ✈ 18:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Yes. Airplaneman ✈ 18:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Well, no images are used, but I understand they are either nonexistent, copyrighted or extremely hard to find. Airplaneman ✈ 18:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Yes, definitely GA status. For FA, I would recommend getting hold of some pictures (if possible). Airplaneman ✈ 18:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]