Talk:SOLRAD 4/GA1
GA Review[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 15:09, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
This looks a very interesting article nominated by Neopeius. I will start this review shortly. simongraham (talk) 15:09, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Criteria[edit]
The six good article criteria:
- Well written
- the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
- it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout etc.
- Verifiable
- it contains a list of all references, presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
- all inline citations are from reliable sources;
- it contains no original research; and
- it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism.
- Broad in its coverage
- it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
- it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail.
- Neutral
- it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to different points of view.
- Stable
- it does not change significantly from day to day because of any ongoing edit war or content dispute.
- Illustrated
- images are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
- images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
Review[edit]
This article is ready for promotion. It is well written with good references and relevant images. The editor has taken note of the previous GA reviews (SOLRAD 1 and SOLRAD 3). @Neopeius: Congratulations on another Good Article. simongraham (talk) 15:20, 28 December 2020 (UTC)