Talk:Yellow-lipped sea krait/GA1

(Redirected from Talk:Laticauda colubrina/GA1)
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Tom29739 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Tom29739 (talk · contribs) 10:32, 9 October 2016 (UTC)Reply


Criteria

edit
Good Article Status - Review Criteria

A good article is—

  1. Well-written:
  2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
  3. Verifiable with no original research:
  4. (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    (b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2]
    (c) it contains no original research; and
    (d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  5. Broad in its coverage:
  6. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  7. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  8. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  9. [4]
  10. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  11. [5]
    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]

Review

edit
  1. Well-written:
  2. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose) Article is well written.   Pass
    (b) (MoS) Article meets the guidelines for lead sections, layout, and words to watch. The guidelines on fiction and list incorporation are not applicable.   Pass
  3. Verifiable with no original research:
  4. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references) References are presented in inline citation form.   Pass
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) All sources given are reliable.   Pass
    (c) (original research) No original research found.   Pass
    (d) (copyvio and plagiarism) Article does not have any plagiarism or copyright violations.   Pass
  5. Broad in its coverage:
  6. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) Main points are covered.   Pass
    (b) (focused) Article does not diverge into other topics.   Pass
  7. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  8. Notes Result
    Article is neutral.   Pass
  9. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  10. Notes Result
    No content disputes or edit wars ongoing at time of review.   Pass
  11. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  12. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) All images are under CC BY or CC BY-SA licenses.   Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) All images are relevant and have captions.   Pass

Result

edit
Result Notes
  Pass Article passes all the good article criteria.

Discussion

edit

Please add any related discussion here.

Additional notes

edit
  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
  2. ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
  3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
  4. ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
  5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  6. ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.