Talk:Jack Dormand/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Good Article Assessment
Here is the current revision of the page. Below is my assessment..
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
- a (fair representation):
- It is stable.
- (no edit wars etc.)
- It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
- a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA):
- a (tagged and captioned):
- Overall:
- a Pass/Fail:
- a Pass/Fail:
- All prose is readable, and doesn't use words that any editor/reader wouldn't understand.
- The article is focused and addresses a broad range of information without going into unnecessary detail.
- It is factually accurate and is backed up comprehensively with verifiable and independent, reliable sources.
- Is a very good article, and made a great read with no POV.
