Talk:Holmipterus/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 00:25, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Comments

• Add a short description to the top of the article.

Done. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:06, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• Is the use of "completely" necessary?

Rephrased that part. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:06, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• "reconsturction" – typo?

Yeah, fixed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 15:06, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Assessment

1. Comprehension: The comprehension is good.
Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	The prose is generally clear, concise and understandable.	Pass
(b) (MoS)	The article is compliant with the manual of style.	Pass

2. Verifiability: The article is verifiable.
Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	The article has a list of references and in-line citations for its contents in the body.	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	Sources used are reliable.	Pass
(c) (original research)	No original research found.	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	No flagrant copyright issues found.	Pass

3. Comprehensiveness: The article is comprehensive.
Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The article broadly covers all major aspects.	Pass
(b) (focused)	The article is focused without unnecessary deviations.	Pass

4. Neutrality: The article is neutral.
Pass

Notes	Result
The article is compliant with the policy on neutral point of view.	Pass

5. Stability: The article is stable.
Pass

Notes	Result
No ongoing content disputes or edit wars present.	Pass

6. Illustration: The article is well illustrated.
Pass

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	No copyright issues found, images are appropriately tagged.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	Use and caption are good.	Pass