Talk:Blue Lake Crater/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ganesha811 (talk · contribs) 18:41, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status using the template below. Ganesha811 (talk) 18:41, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	In lead: Remove comma between "three" and "overlapping" for readability Last sentence of first paragraph should be split in two, probably around '2009' Is there a link available for 'spatter cones'? 'Esoteric' is odd word choice here - maybe 'little-known' or 'little-used'? In 'Human history and recreation', typo - 'widlife' should be 'wildlife' Generally good prose, no major issues Fixed issues myself (WP:BOLD) - should be all set now. Ganesha811 (talk) 20:11, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Pass - no issues.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Pass. No issues.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Pass. No issues.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Pass - no issues.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Pass - no issues.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Pass. Covers all important aspects of topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Pass. Well-written.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Pass - no issues.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Pass - no issues.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Pass. No issues.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Pass. No issues.
	7. Overall assessment.

Fixed the minor existing issues myself (WP:BOLD) and passed. Good article, nomination was smooth. Congrats to ceranthor and others who worked on this article! Ganesha811 (talk) 20:11, 26 August 2019 (UTC)