Talk:Community Notes/GA2
GA Review
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Cocobb8 (talk · contribs) 16:51, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
GA review
Last updated: 17:04, 28 February 2024 (UTC) by Cocobb8
Estimated finish date: March 4, 2024
Status: 
Reviewing...
10% reviewed
See what the criteria are and what they are not
1) Well-written
1a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct
- 1b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation
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
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)
- 2c) it contains no original research
- 2d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism
3) Broad in its coverage
3a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic
- 3b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)
4) Neutral:
- 4) Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each
5) Stable:
- 5) Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute
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
- 6b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions
Overall:
Comments:
@CommunityNotesContributor: @CodemWiki: I am starting this review. It shouldn't take too long! Feel free to let me know if you have any questions during the review process.
First reading the article, it reads very easily, and summarizes very well the subject and is also understandable to a broad audience.
@CommunityNotesContributor: Please consider moving the sources in the lead somewhere else in the article to avoid sources repetition, see WP:LEADCITE.