Talk:Hamdog/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Joe Gazz84^user•_talk•^contribs•_{Editor Review} 22:17, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Initial Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

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:

• This article lacks almost every element in a good article. There are almost zero illustrations, there is no detail in the article and does not ever focus in at a single point on an topic. Below are a complete list of issues:
  • No illustrations
  • Article never focuses in on a concept
  • Article has many short basic paragraphs
  • Misuse of capital letters
  • Lacks references
  • Lacks complete sentences

I would recommend re-reading the criteria for good article status and re-submitting at a later time. Joe Gazz84^user•_talk•^contribs•_{Editor Review} 22:46, 25 August 2010 (UTC)