Talk:McLaughlin Planetarium/GA1

GA Reassessment

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

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:15, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   I made a minor copy-edit to remove the currently as of 2008 bit. Updates acn be made when / if the building is demolished. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:46, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   I used WP:CHECKLINKS to fix a dead link and other minor fixes. I fixed a cite to geocities.com to a copy of the article archived at Nexis. I replaced a cite to geocities about Geospace Planetarium with a cite to that organsiations' website. All other references check out. Foramts could be tidied for consistency. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:46, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

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:

   • OK, I have no hesitation in confirming the status of this as a Good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)