Talk:Project A119/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Astrocog (talk • contribs • count) 00:24, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Review in progress.AstroCog (talk) 00:24, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

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

---

Nice article overall. Does what it needs to do.

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

   Good writing overall. Prose gets to the point.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   Plenty of reliable references, well cited.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   No problems here.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   No problems here.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Seems fairly stable.

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):

   It's got images. Not sure what other images could improve the article.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   This one was pretty easy. After reading