Template:GAstart
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
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: 16px
- B. Complies with MoS guidance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:16px
- A. Prose is clear and concise, understandable, without spelling and grammar errors: 16px
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section: 16px
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: 16px
- C. No original research: 16px
- D. No copyright violations nor plagiarism: 16px
- A. Has an appropriate reference section: 16px
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects: 16px
- B. Focused: 16px
- A. Major aspects: 16px
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias: 16px
- Fair representation without bias: 16px
- Is it stable?
- Does it contain media such as images, images, video, or audio to illustrate the topic?
- A. Media are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: 16px
- B. Media are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 16px
- A. Media are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: 16px
Comments on GA criteria
- Pass
- Query
- Fail