Talk:20 euro note
20 euro note has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:20 euro note/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Puffin (talk · contribs) 12:56, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. |
| |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. |
| |
2b. 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). | see above | |
2c. it contains no original research. | I agree, I must have 'misplaced' the correct citation, which is now Done | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | ||
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | The Obverse and Reverse pictures havo no captions. Please add one in such as "The obverse of the note" and "The reverse of the note.
| |
7. Overall assessment. |
- Please don't delete the comments I made in the table, instead, comment under them and maybe cross them out when they are done? It just makes it easier for anyone who wants to look at the review can see what needs to be done. Puffin Let's talk! 18:04, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- I just noticed reference number 41 "Basic calculator work used here." That is not a reliable reference and should maybe be a note or further reading. Puffin Let's talk! 18:06, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Can the way I got it be a source? – Plarem (User talk contribs) 14:51, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Remove the citation all together. Also, [reference number 8 says that it was retrieved in 2002, but the article was created in 2009. [1] Puffin Let's talk! 16:48, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Can the way I got it be a source? – Plarem (User talk contribs) 14:51, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- I just noticed reference number 41 "Basic calculator work used here." That is not a reliable reference and should maybe be a note or further reading. Puffin Let's talk! 18:06, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- But every statistic has to be cited... – Plarem (User talk contribs) 17:15, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- An amazing improvement, just one more minor thing needs to be fixed.
Reference number 10 is a dead link, could you possible fix that? It's tagged with the dead link template.Done Puffin Let's talk! 08:12, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
- An amazing improvement, just one more minor thing needs to be fixed.
- But every statistic has to be cited... – Plarem (User talk contribs) 17:15, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- Done. Anything else? – Plarem (User talk contribs) 18:49, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
It's still a dead link. ^ "The monetary agreement, the road space adapted to micro-economic". Retrieved 6 September 2011.[dead link]Done Puffin Let's talk! 20:23, 15 October 2011 (UTC)- Done, something must have undone what I did. – Plarem (User talk contribs) 21:03, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for reviewing it. – Plarem (User talk contribs) 09:43, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
- Congrats Mohamed Aden Ighe (talk) 23:33, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
GA Reassessment
edit- This discussion is transcluded from Talk:20 euro note/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.
- GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- Reference #9 is a dead link. Has been dead since 2012-07-01. Done
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Comment
editDone – Plarem (User talk) 12:31, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
Capitalisation
editShouldn't the E be capitalised? Philafrenzy (talk) 14:59, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on 20 euro note. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607234444/http://www.unmikonline.org/regulations/admdirect/1999/089%20Final%20%20ADE%201999-02.htm to http://www.unmikonline.org/regulations/admdirect/1999/089%20Final%20%20ADE%201999-02.htm
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&language=en&pcode=tps00001&tableSelection=1&footnotes=yes&labeling=labels&plugin=1
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130911232930/http://ec.europa.eu:80/economy_finance/focuson/focuson9120_en.htm to http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/focuson/focuson9120_en.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070926234241/http://www.dnb.nl/dnb/home?lang=en&id=tcm:47-150696-64 to http://www.dnb.nl/dnb/home?lang=en&id=tcm:47-150696-64
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:13, 29 September 2016 (UTC)