Talk:Leopard catshark/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Xtzou (Talk) 19:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

• Very well done and nicely illustrated. (Is that the editor's hand in the infobox picture? Xtzou (Talk) 19:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality: Clear, concise wording

   B. MoS compliance: Complies with the required MoS elements

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources: Reliable sources

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: Well referenced

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects: Sets the context

   B. Focused: Remains focused on the subject

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: Pass!

Congratulations! Xtzou (Talk) 19:51, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! And no, that is not my hand in the image. -- Yzx (talk) 23:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)