Jump to content

Talk:Ina Kaplan/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Cerebellum (talk · contribs) 08:40, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]


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): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Complies with MoS, prose is solid.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
    References all check out, no issues.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Would be nice to have an image, but I couldn't find a free one of the subject. Not the end of the world.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Pass as GA, no significant issues. My only other note is that the last external link is dead. Sorry for the short review, I really couldn't find anything else to improve. --Cerebellum (talk) 12:45, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]