Talk:Meteorological history of Hurricane Kyle (2002)/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review (see here for criteria)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): It is well written with tight prose.
b (MoS): Follows MoS
- a (prose): It is well written with tight prose.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable c (OR):
- a (references): Well referenced
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): Article subject places in contex b (focused): Well focused on subject of article
- a (major aspects): Article subject places in contex
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias: Neutral in viewpoint
- Fair representation without bias: Neutral in viewpoint
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
A good job as usual! Article passes GA. —Mattisse (Talk) 23:24, 8 October 2008 (UTC)