Talk:WASP-43b/GA1

Latest comment: 13 years ago by Jezhotwells in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 22:34, 16 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:37, 16 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Checking against GA criteria

edit
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
    Well written, complies sufficiently with MoS
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
    References check out OK, reliable sources, no evidence of OR
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
    Sufficient detail for a recently discovered extra-solar object
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
    Neutral
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
    Stable, no edit warring
  6. 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):  
    No images used
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
    This article meets the criteria so I am happy to promote it. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)Reply