Talk:Joran van der Sloot/GA2
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 16:20, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.
Disambiguations: none found
Linkrot: one found and tagged.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 16:26, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
Checking against GA criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- Well referenced, sources RS, no OR,
one EL is a dead link.Done/June%2030,%202010%20VD%20Sloot%20%20Indictment.pdf
- Well referenced, sources RS, no OR,
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Thorough, without needless trivia
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- NPOV
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- Licensed and captioned
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Just one dead link to be fixed or removed. On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:08, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
- As the dead link has been fixed, i am happy to list this. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 21:15, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail: