Talk:MacBook Pro/GA1

Latest comment: 14 years ago by MWOAP in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: -- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 21:39, 23 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Criterion

edit

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:  
    I am unable to understand the model numbers.
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:  
    17.1 of the MoS
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:  
    Reference 24 & 25 are not reliable. Emails need to be removed.
    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):  
    Major Sections of unsourced paragraphs.
    C. It contains no original research:  
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:  
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:  
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):  
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:  
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:  
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:  
    Images are good to go, could use another image though.
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  
    Needs some more work before I can pass it.


Comments

edit

Please do not change the status of the criterion; the reviewer will change them himself as needed.

Thanks for reviewing! I've got a few comments right off the bat. The criterion they relate to are bolded so you can see them better:

Sorry about not providing details on why, I meant to, just somehow forgot. -- /MWOAP|Notify Me\ 01:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)Reply