Talk:Currencies of Puerto Rico

Latest comment: 15 years ago by Caribbean H.Q. in topic GA Review
Good articleCurrencies of Puerto Rico 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 2, 2009Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 15, 2009.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the first 8-real banknotes were printed in Puerto Rico in 1766?

GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:Currencies of Puerto Rico/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

To start, the lead needs to be broken up into multiple paragraphs. The entire article has many long paragraphs that can simply be split up. I didn't have time to review it all now, but what I read looks very good and well-referenced. Reywas92Talk 21:26, 21 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry for the late reply, I'm on it. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:41, 28 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
I believe the first issues have been attended. - Caribbean~H.Q. 02:54, 28 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
    I have performed a small copyedit. Nothing except they odd typo, but there were a number capitalization errors.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  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, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
    Thorough, exiting and well written article. No problems meeting the good article criteria. Congratulations!
Thanks for your review, sorry for the delayed response. - Caribbean~H.Q. 22:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Reply