Talk:WASP-13/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: I will review this article against the good article criteria. Tyrol5 [Talk] 20:44, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

Nicely written article, an interesting read.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   I'm having issues with reference #1; the abstract does not appear to supply cited information.

   Resolved

    – I've found the PDF article

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

   I've no reason to suspect OR, but I can't seem to find cited info in ref #1.

   Resolved

    – I've Found the PDF article

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   N/A; No images used in article.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Article, overall, looks good to me. Will wait until I hear from you on the journal reference. On hold for seven days. Tyrol5 [Talk] 20:59, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

   I've found the PDF and resolved the issue. Everything looks good; glad to list as good article. Tyrol5 [Talk] 21:42, 26 August 2011 (UTC)