Talk:Geastrum triplex/GA1

GA Review

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

Okay, let's get this party started...Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:01, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

• I'd note something about distribution in the lead. Stuff it, I did it myself.

More later. This one came together nicely, and is over the line for GA. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:59, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

Prose is fine. Article complies with MOS.

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c(OR):

   Well-referenced to reliable sources.

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Thorough treatment of all important topics.

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

5. 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):

   All images have appropriate free use licenses.

6. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Pending a couple of revisions.