Talk:Matiu / Somes Island/GA2
Latest comment: 8 months ago by Jonathanischoice in topic GA Review
GA Review edit
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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jonathanischoice (talk · contribs) 23:23, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Happy to review this over the next few days. I will build up comments below as I go. — Jon (talk) 23:23, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
- First things first, on first read through I agree with Dr vulpes' assessments from GA1, so I will start from those assessments and carry on, starting with addressing and re-assessing comments left on GA1.—Jon (talk) 04:37, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | (See GA1) | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | lead ok; layout ok; w2w ok; fiction n/a; lists ok | |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | Satisfied | |
2b. 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). | Satisfactory | |
2c. it contains no original research. | (See GA1) | |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | (See GA1) The copyvio report returns nothing alarming; the highest 32.4% result is a description from a 2009 Flickr image that was yoinked from a 2009 version of this article. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Satisfied | |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Satisfied | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | (See GA1) | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | (See GA1) | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | (See GA1) | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | (See GA1). Added birds gallery | |
7. Overall assessment. | Excellent work! |
Review comments edit
Lead
|
---|
|
Toponymy
|
---|
|
Geology and geography
|
---|
|
History
|
---|
|
Environmental restoration
|
---|
|
In the arts
|
---|
|
References
|
---|
|
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.