Talk:Norid/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 22:30, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: one found and fixed.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 22:31, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:32, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

   to determine domain deputes Is domain disputes meant? Or deputising of domains? Or something else? Y

   I made a few minor copy-edits.[2]

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   Sources check out, all are reliable.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Thorough and focussed.

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):

   On logo used with appropriate tag and rationale.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   OK, just one query. On Hold for seven days.

   OK, thanks for fixing that. I am happy to pass this as a good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:03, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to review the article. I meant "domain disputes" and fix it to that. Thanks for the copyedit. Arsenikk ^(talk) 09:53, 24 October 2010 (UTC)