Talk:Weywot/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Praseodymium-141 (talk · contribs) 07:41, 26 April 2023 (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, spelling, and grammar):

   Only issue I could find:

   • In 2013 and prior - this sounds strange, maybe reword it.

Fixed. Nrco0e (talk) 05:02, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

1. b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

   b. (citations to reliable sources):

   Issues:

   • Is ref 1 reliable?
   • Is ref 8 reliable?
   • Is ref 10 reliable?
   • Is ref 11 reliable?

I believe all of these references are reliable.

Ref 1 is intended to provide a citation for Terry-Ann Suer's full name. There's no other source that mentions her name without using initials, and this is the only one I can find. This website was published by Suer herself and it pretty much lists all her academic publications, including the CBAT publication of Weywot's discovery [ref 2] which indeed confirms that she was involved in it.

Ref 8 is the International Occultation Timing Association (IOTA's) main website for publishing occultation results see link. Occultation results from this webpage have been cited in reputable journals, such as this 2021 paper by Levine et al. here. Therefore it is appropriate to use this website as a reference in this article.

Ref 10 is a webpage maintained by Will Grundy, who is a well-established researcher and expert in binary TNO systems see publications. Considering his reputable background, I trust the data he publishes on his webpage about binary TNOs.

Ref 11 (plus 13 and 14 which I added) is intended to confirm specifically that Brown is responsible for the 2007 and 2008 Hubble observations of Weywot, since he is the principal investigator of these observations. These refs are mentioned in Fraser et al. 2010 (ref 12), the official paper publishing the results from these observations. Nrco0e (talk) 05:02, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

1. c. (OR):

   d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a. (major aspects):

   I'm not sure if this article covers all of the main aspects. Is there anything else to add? (I don't know a lot about this topic.)

This is pretty much all we know about Weywot. I've looked through every relevant source available, including academic papers on the Astrophyiscs Data System; those that I've left out are either completely outdated (Vachier et al. 2012) or not relevant or informative enough. Nrco0e (talk) 05:02, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

1. b. (focused):

2. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

3. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

4. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

   b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

5. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

Not much to say about this article apart from above. ¹⁴¹Pr {contribs} 12:47, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.