Talk:Getty Foundation/GA2

Latest comment: 13 years ago by SarahStierch in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: SarahStierch (talk) 22:10, 18 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

This is a nice, simply written article that provides a basic and stable encyclopedic review of the Getty Foundation. It's layout is easily readable as well.

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  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):  
    No photos really available, logo, etc. Fine with no image.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
    The only addition I could see to this is an organization infobox perhaps?