Talk:Polaris Project/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Maclean25 (talk · contribs) 04:54, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
- Good article review (see Wikipedia:What is a good article? for criteria)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- References need to be formatted to indicate at least the publisher or author of the work.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- 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):
- One image used File:Polaris Project Logo.png with valid fair use rationale.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Comments:I am quick-failing this article based on copy-right violations. [1] [2] It appears much of this article was copy and pasted from elsewhere in Spring 2010 and gone undetected since then. Before re-nominating the article, account for where all the information has come from with references/citations and remove the {{refimprove}} tags. —maclean (talk) 04:54, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail: