Talk:Tom Araya/GA1
Appearance
GA Reassessment
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:05, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Checking against GA criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
- b (MoS):
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
- All web links are live; referenced statemenst check out. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- b (citations to reliable sources):
- All sources appear reliable. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- c (OR):
- I find no evidence of OR. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- a (references):
- It is broad in its scope.
- a (major aspects):
- b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- OK, no problems with this, keep GA status. You may wish to consider updating as there is not much post 2006. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail: