Talk:Hungry Bay Nature Reserve/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 09:42, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to undertake this review. On a preliminary view, the article is quite short but seems to cover the main aspects of the subject.

The lead is supposed to be a summary of the rest of the article, and should not contain anything that is not included elsewhere. In this case, the lead mentions two endangered crabs which are not further mentioned.
- They both are, in the Fauna section. QatarStarsLeague (talk) 02:23, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It also mentions information on Ramsar sites which is not elsewhere. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:14, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For the reason mentioned above, it should not be necessary to have citations in the lead, because the relevant facts should have their references in the main body of the text.
- Ok. QatarStarsLeague (talk) 02:23, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the references are bare urls. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:42, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- All clear. QatarStarsLeague (talk) 02:23, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"The reserve can be reached by motorway," - This seems a bit misleading as one source states "Public access to the site is limited and only possible through private lands. Public access will not be encouraged."

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:59, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

- Fixed.QatarStarsLeague (talk) 02:23, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have put this review on hold. If within one week action is taken on the issues mentioned above, I will review the article further, otherwise I will consider whether it currently meets the good article criteria and if it does not, it will fail. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:26, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have done a little copyediting, mostly in connection with wikilinks. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:14, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We just need something about the reserve being a Ramsar site, and why it fulfils the qualifications, in the body of the article. At present it is only in the lead. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:48, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have done some copyediting and have added some information about the Ramsar site to the body of the text.
I think this article reaches the necessary GA criteria; it is well-written and laid out, it is well-referenced and contains no original research, it covers the main aspects of the topic, is neutral and is stable. It lacks images, apart from the range map, because none are available. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:02, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]