Talk:Theodore Stephanides/GA2
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: John B123 (talk · contribs) 18:15, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- Suggestions from the previous GA review, User talk:John B123#Theodore Stephanides and User talk:Ritchie333#GA Review have been implemented
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
A couple of references need page numbers added- John B123 Is it OK now? Taurus Littrow (talk) 19:55, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
- That looks fine now
- John B123 Is it OK now? Taurus Littrow (talk) 19:55, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
- C. It contains no original research:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- Previous copy-vio problems seem to have been resolved
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- The only recent changes are by the creator further improving the article
- Aamof, I didn't create the page. I greatly contributed to it, though. Taurus Littrow (talk) 21:07, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
- The only recent changes are by the creator further improving the article
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- All images are in the public domain
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Well done
- Pass or Fail:
