Jump to content

Talk:John Parkinson (botanist)/Archive: GA review

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


GA review

I've taken on this review, due to other commitments, may not be very speedy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimfbleak (talkcontribs) 10:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

No worries, take your time. :-) — Cheers, JackLee talk 12:57, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I've made one minor revision, checked images and refs, so here goes

Good Article nomination

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Jimfbleak (talk) 07:19, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Wonderful! Thanks for the Christmas present. — Cheers, JackLee talk 00:42, 21 December 2007 (UTC)