Jump to content

Talk:Crater Glacier/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    Well done.
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    In the History section, "2004" should not be linked, per here.
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. 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):
    The date on Reference 23 needs to be fixed.
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article! Also, contact me if the above statements are answered.

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, unlinked unimportant years, such as 1980, 1981, 2004. Also checked the date on ref 23 and it said 12/2004, and unlinked 2004-12 and Austin Post, which were both redlinks. Cheers. Trance addict - Armin van Buuren - Oceanlab 19:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you to Trance addict for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) Also, what topic does the article go in? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:27, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]