Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: –Grondemar 03:07, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Working Will aim to complete this review in the next couple of days. –Grondemar 03:07, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The first thing I noticed was that there are several unreferenced statements. I added ((cn)) tags where citations need to be added. Will continue to review. –Grondemar 12:44, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Additionally, Ref 5 is a deadlink, and needs to be replaced. –Grondemar 16:52, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I made some copyedits throughout the article; beyond that, and the citation issues mentioned above, I see no problems with it. Once the requested citations are provided I'll be happy to pass this article as a Good Article.
- GA review (see here for criteria)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- 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):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- This article will be on hold for a minimum of seven days to allow for the above issues to be corrected.
Thank you. –Grondemar 16:52, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I believe all the cite issues are now addressed. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:48, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree all of the citation issues have been addressed, and will pass this article now. Congratulations! –Grondemar 16:36, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]