Talk:Dolphinarium/GA1
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Jezhotwells in topic GA Reassessment
GA Reassessment edit
Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:00, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Checking against GA criteria edit
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
The Lead does not adequately summarise the whole article. Please read WP:LEAD for guidelines. I would also like you to look at the WP:External links and see if they are all necessary and add encyclopaedic content.
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Ref #3, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13 are dead links. Compuserve and geocities are not WP:RS
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
May need some updating.
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
Just the concerns noted above to be addressed, on hold for seven days, major contributors and projects will be notified. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:18, 15 November 2009 (UTC)- I see some work is being done - are you ready for me to have another look? Jezhotwells (talk) 18:58, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Nothing has been done about the lead - it should be at least 3 paras for an article like this and summarise the whole article. Still has one dead link [1], which is geocities and not RS anyway. I moved the book into further reading and formatted the citation. I will take a look tomorrow and make a decision then. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:22, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
- Thanks for fixing that. I fixed the last remaining dead link and expanded the lead per above. Note that MOS indicates that the appropriate length of the lead is 2-3 paragraphs for articles of this size. Elekhh (talk) 00:35, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
- OK, I am happy to confirm that this article is worthy of GA status. Thanks for your hard work. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for fixing that. I fixed the last remaining dead link and expanded the lead per above. Note that MOS indicates that the appropriate length of the lead is 2-3 paragraphs for articles of this size. Elekhh (talk) 00:35, 23 November 2009 (UTC)