GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    Reviewer Comments: {{{1aNotes}}}
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Reviewer Comments: {{{1bNotes}}}
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    Reviewer Comments: {{{2aNotes}}}
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    Reviewer Comments: {{{2bNotes}}}
    c (OR):
    Reviewer Comments: {{{2cNotes}}}
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):
    Reviewer Comments: {{{2dNotes}}}
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    Reviewer Comments: {{{3aNotes}}}
    b (focused):
    Reviewer Comments: {{{3bNotes}}}
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    Reviewer Comments: {{{4Notes}}}
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    Reviewer Comments: {{{5Notes}}}
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    Reviewer Comments: {{{6aNotes}}}
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Reviewer Comments: {{{6bNotes}}}

Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Reviewer Comments: {{{7Notes}}}

· · ·