Talk:Lalji Singh/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: AmaryllisGardener (talk · contribs) 16:45, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Notes

I made some improvements to the article, but some things still need tending to:

• "These findings later became the foundation for the discovery of a similar phenomenon of sex reversal in human." needs a ref.
• All of the things listed in "Awards and Honors" that don't have refs need them. Nevermind
• While not required, a little more copyediting would be great.

--AmaryllisGardener ^talk 17:07, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Assuming w.carter is done copyediting, I've decided to promote this article to GA. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 01:16, 22 January 2015 (UTC)