Talk:Aphid/GA1

Latest comment: 11 years ago by Cwmhiraeth in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 18:00, 1 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

I plan to review this article and hope to post some comments here in the next couple of days. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:00, 1 December 2012 (UTC)Reply
Before I go through the article in detail there are some things you could attend to.
  • In the lead section there is a tag "not verified in body". This will need dealing with. The lead should be a summary of what is contained in the rest of the article and should not introduce information not mentioned elsewhere. Nor does it usually have references because the facts mentioned in the lead should be referenced when they occur in the body of the article.
  • At the moment some paragraphs have no references. There should be at least one per paragraph and more when information comes from multiple sources. See here for guidance on writing references. "Wikipedia's Verifiability policy requires inline citations for any material challenged or likely to be challenged, and for all quotations, anywhere in article space. However, editors are advised to provide citations for all material added to Wikipedia." The references in the article at the moment are well formatted and you should keep to the same style. If you need any help ask here or on my talk page. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:22, 1 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

GA review now on hold

edit

Looking at the history of this article I see that no substantial alterations have been made for some time prior to it being nominated for GA. Since I made the above comments a week ago no action has been taken on any of them. I have put the review on hold and will make a more detailed review if I see evidence of anyone trying to raise the article to GA standard. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:50, 8 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

GA Fail

edit

I am failing this article on the grounds that it is not well-enough referenced and no attempt has been made to improve it along the lines outlined above. Please nominate it again when these matters have been resolved. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:11, 15 December 2012 (UTC)Reply