Talk:Kepler-5b/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Tarret ^talk 18:14, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

Due to having similar structures and being relate topics the articles Kepler-5b, Kepler-6b, and Kepler-7b were reviewed simlutaneously. Also, the current GA-class article Kepler-4b, was used as a "model" article for this review process.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Very well written articles. Where possible try to use the same section headings across each article where the content is of a similar nature for example one article calls a section "Host Star" and another "Parent Star". Also, if possible merge all of the "Kepler-x System" templates into one "Kepler Mission" template and remove the "See Also" at the end of the articles which contain them.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

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:

   In general very good articles, keep up the good work and if possible feel free to visit WP:GAN and review an article.