Difference between revisions of "Template:GAstart"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>SilkTork |
imported>SilkTork (update) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
===Tick box=== | ===Tick box=== | ||
| − | '''[[Wikipedia:Good article nominations|GA]] review – see [[ | + | [[File:Symbol support vote.svg|25px|right]]</noinclude>{{-}} |
| + | '''[[Wikipedia:Good article nominations|GA]] review – see [[Wikipedia:Good article criteria]] for detailed criteria''' | ||
| − | #Is it ''' | + | #Is it '''well written'''? |
| − | #:A. Prose is clear and concise, without | + | #:A. Prose is clear and concise, [[Wikipedia:Make technical articles understandable|understandable]], without spelling and grammar errors: {{GAList/check|}} |
#:: | #:: | ||
| − | #:B. [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|MoS]] | + | #:B. Complies with [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|MoS]] guidance for [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section|lead]], [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout|layout]], [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch|words to watch]], [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction|fiction]], and [[Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lists#Embedded_lists|lists]]:{{GAList/check|}} |
#:: | #:: | ||
#Is it '''factually accurate''' and '''[[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]]'''? | #Is it '''factually accurate''' and '''[[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]]'''? | ||
| − | #:A. Has an [[Wikipedia: | + | #:A. Has an [[Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Layout#Standard_appendices_and_footers|appropriate reference section]]: {{GAList/check|}} |
#:: | #:: | ||
| − | #:B. Citation to reliable sources [[Wikipedia:Good article criteria/where necessary|where necessary]]: {{GAList/check|}} | + | #:B. Citation to [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable]] sources [[Wikipedia:Good article criteria/where necessary|where necessary]]: {{GAList/check|}} |
#:: | #:: | ||
#:C. [[Wikipedia:No original research|No original research]]: {{GAList/check|}} | #:C. [[Wikipedia:No original research|No original research]]: {{GAList/check|}} | ||
#:: | #:: | ||
| + | #:D. No [[Wikipedia:Copyright violations|copyright violations]] nor [[Wikipedia:Plagiarism|plagiarism]]: {{GAList/check|}} | ||
| + | #:: | ||
#Is it '''broad in its coverage'''? | #Is it '''broad in its coverage'''? | ||
| − | #:A. [[Wikipedia: | + | #:A. [[Wikipedia:Out of scope|Major aspects]]: {{GAList/check|}} |
#:: | #:: | ||
| − | #:B. [[ | + | #:B. [[Wikipedia:Article size|Focused]]: {{GAList/check|}} |
#:: | #:: | ||
| − | #Is it '''[[ | + | #Is it '''[[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view |neutral]]'''? |
#:Fair representation without bias: {{GAList/check|}} | #:Fair representation without bias: {{GAList/check|}} | ||
#:: | #:: | ||
| Line 28: | Line 31: | ||
#: No [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit wars]], etc: {{GAList/check|}} | #: No [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit wars]], etc: {{GAList/check|}} | ||
#:: | #:: | ||
| − | #Does it '''contain [[Wikipedia:Images|images]]''' to illustrate the topic? | + | #Does it '''contain media such as images, [[Wikipedia:Images|images]], [[Wikipedia:Videos|video]], or audio ''' to illustrate the topic? |
| − | #:A. Images are [[Wikipedia: | + | #:A. Images are [[Wikipedia:File copyright tags|tagged]] with their [[Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright|copyright status]], and [[Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline|valid fair use rationales]] are provided for [[Wikipedia:Non-free content|non-free content]]: {{GAList/check|}} |
#:: | #:: | ||
| − | #:B. Images are provided if possible and are [[ | + | #:B. Images are provided if possible and are [[Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Images#Pertinence_and_encyclopedic_nature|relevant]] to the topic, and have [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Captions|suitable captions]]: {{GAList/check|}} |
| − | #:: | + | #:: |
| − | |||
| Line 46: | Line 48: | ||
===General comments=== | ===General comments=== | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ===Pass/Hold/Fail=== | ||
Revision as of 11:07, 20 November 2019
I'll start reading over the next few days and then begin to make comments. I am normally a slow reviewer - if that is likely to be a problem, please let me know as soon as possible. I tend to directly do copy-editing and minor improvements as I'm reading the article rather than list them here; if there is a lot of copy-editing to be done I may suggest getting a copy-editor (on the basis that a fresh set of eyes is helpful). Anything more significant than minor improvements I will raise here. I see the reviewer's role as collaborative and collegiate, so I welcome discussion regarding interpretation of the criteria. SilkTork (talk)
Tick box
GA review – see Wikipedia:Good article criteria for detailed criteria
- Is it well written?
- A. Prose is clear and concise, understandable, without spelling and grammar errors:
- B. Complies with MoS guidance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
- A. Prose is clear and concise, understandable, without spelling and grammar errors:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- D. No copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain media such as images, images, video, or audio to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are provided if possible and 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:
Comments on GA criteria
- Pass
- Query
- Fail