Talk:Reticulate whipray/GA1

Latest comment: 14 years ago by Yzx in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk) 12:16, 12 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Will commence read through and post any comments as I come across issues. If neccessary I might make alterations to prose as I proceed - if I accidently change the meaning then please feel free to reverse those changes. Miyagawa (talk) 12:16, 12 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Had to look up "fishes" because I was sure the correct plural was simply fish - but you were right, it's fishes when talking about multiple different species. Miyagawa (talk) 12:50, 12 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

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:  

Can't see any issues with the article that would prevent it from being graded a GA. I can tell you've done a few of these. :) Miyagawa (talk) 16:32, 12 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! -- Yzx (talk) 17:33, 12 April 2010 (UTC)Reply