Talk:The Sixth Extinction II: Amor Fati/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 11:20, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

   Overall good prose. I removed the "mostly" in "mostly mixed". If something received mixed responses means that it had both positive and negative reception, so you can not say "mostly mixed". --♫GoP♫_T^C_N 13:44, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

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):

   I can't see the picture File:Kazantzakis black and white.jpg in [1].

7. Overall: URL needs to be updated, but by and large meets the GA criteria.

   Pass/Fail:

OK, I believe I've addressed the image concern.--Gen. Quon (talk) 17:12, 19 February 2012 (UTC)