Talk:Le Règne Animal/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Gug01 (talk · contribs) 14:54, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious large mistakes[edit]

There are no obvious large mistakes. In addition, this article lacks {{POW}}, {{unreferenced}}, {{citation needed}} or tags of similar sort.

Punctuation, capitalization, spelling, grammar and prose[edit]

The punctuation, capitalization, spelling and grammar is correct. This article talks about the book in good prose.

Lead section[edit]

The lead section accurately condenses the article and gives a good, proper introduction communicated through prose.

Referencing and plagiarism[edit]

The referencing is correct. There are all reliable sources. The article does not copy text without attributing its source. It doesn't plagiarize at all in any way.

Comprehensiveness[edit]

This article is broad and discusses every important part in the book. It is very comprehensive. It occasionally goes into detail, but only because that is necessary.

Point of view[edit]

This article is written from a neutral point of view.

Stability[edit]

This article is stable, so stable that there is not a single undo in its history.

Overview[edit]

This article is great to be a good article. I have a suggestion that is not part of the Good article criteria, but is still valid. Only five users has contributed to this article, and User:Chiswick Chap has made the overwhelming majority of edits. It would be nice if other editors would make lots of edits and help a lot. However, this article is still good article material. This article is perfect to be a good article.

Many thanks for the review. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:58, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You welcome! I only did what was right. This article should have been a good article after the first review! Gug01 (talk) 18:29, 2 January 2015 (UTC) Gug 01[reply]