Talk:Joran van der Sloot/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 16:20, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found

Linkrot: one found and tagged.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 16:26, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   I find the article reasonably well written, complies with key elements of MoS

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Well referenced, sources RS, no OR, one EL is a dead link. Done/June%2030,%202010%20VD%20Sloot%20%20Indictment.pdf

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Thorough, without needless trivia

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   NPOV

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):

   Licensed and captioned

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Just one dead link to be fixed or removed. On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:08, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

   As the dead link has been fixed, i am happy to list this. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 21:15, 13 March 2011 (UTC)