Talk:Kepler-7b/GA1

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

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Tarret talk 18:15, 19 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

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

Due to having similar structures and being relate topics the articles Kepler-5b, Kepler-6b, and Kepler-7b were reviewed simlutaneously. Also, the current GA-class article Kepler-4b, was used as a "model" article for this review process.

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
    Very well written articles. Where possible try to use the same section headings across each article where the content is of a similar nature for example one article calls a section "Host Star" and another "Parent Star". Also, if possible merge all of the "Kepler-x System" templates into one "Kepler Mission" template and remove the "See Also" at the end of the articles which contain them.
  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:  
    In general very good articles, keep up the good work and if possible feel free to visit WP:GAN and review an article.