Talk:Uruguay/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I'll be reviewing your article. Thanks, KensplanetTalkContributions
Check out the Good article criteria here:
(1). Well written: 
1 (a). the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct; and 
1 (b). it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.
- Uruguay has an impressive legacy of artistic and literary traditions, especially for its small size. The contribution of its alternating conquerors and diverse immigrants has resulted in native traditions that integrate this diversity and many more....
(2). Factually accurate and verifiable:
2 (a). it provides references to all sources of information, and at minimum contains a section dedicated to the attribution of those sources in accordance with the guide to layout;
2 (b). at minimum, it provides in-line citations from reliable sources 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; and
2 (c). it contains no original research.
- It may contain original research.
Many of the European immigrants arrived to Uruguay in the late 1800s and have heavily influenced the architecture and culture of Montevideo and other major cities. For this reason, Montevideo and life within the city are very reminiscent of Western Europe and many many more.......
(3). Broad in its coverage: 
3 (a). it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
3 (b). it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail
(4). Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.
(5). Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
(6). Illustrated, if possible, by images:
6 (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
6 (b). images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions
- Tremendous amountof uncited material, especially in the History section, and all other section. Contentious claims not at all cited throughout. This article miserably fails as far as Criterion 2 is concerned. I would not spend much time on the article, as this article is nowhere near GA status. May I suggest a Peer review to be done.
Wikipedia:Featured articles#Geography and places
Some similar Country GA and FA models, which you can refer to improve the article. All the best. Thankyou, KensplanetTC 05:43, 16 June 2009 (UTC)