Talk:Nuclear power/GA2

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: JackFromReedsburg (talk · contribs) 17:33, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I will be reviewing this article soon. Expect comments in the next few days. JackFromReedsburg (talk | contribs) 17:33, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

General comments[edit]

This should not be in the lead: "This article mostly deals with nuclear fission power for electricity generation."

Done

No citations in lead, which is good because all of the information is in the article

Yes, this was intentional. All information in the lead is present in more detail and referenced in the article body. --Ita140188 (talk) 12:43, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the history section, I recommend moving the france graph to the gallery.

Done --Ita140188 (talk) 02:31, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Life cycle of nuclear fuel" section is not sourced.

Done rewrote partially and added sources --Ita140188 (talk) 12:40, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It might be useful to have a short summary on nuclear waste in its section (before going into the specific types), although not required

Done I tried to give a brief intro. Let me know if it is enough. --Ita140188 (talk) 01:43, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Nuclear decommissioning" is also unsourced.

Done rewrote and added sources --Ita140188 (talk) 03:22, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Use in space" is unsourced.

Done rewrote partially and added source --Ita140188 (talk) 02:39, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All images are properly licenced.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Discussion[edit]

Article has several issues (including referencing) that need to be fixed. I will put this on hold for now. --JackFromReedsburg (talk | contribs) 15:43, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JackFromReedsburg: Thank you! I will address the comments in the coming days. --Ita140188 (talk) 16:05, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JackFromReedsburg: I tried to address all the comments. Please let me know if there are any other areas that can be improved. Thanks! --Ita140188 (talk) 01:45, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ita140188: Thank you for fixing the issues. I don't see anything preventing this from becoming a GA, so I will be promoting it. (I changed my name, so hopefully the bots don't get annoyed) JackFromWisconsin (talk | contribs) 01:36, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JackFromWisconsin: Great! Thank you for the review! --Ita140188 (talk) 01:47, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]