Talk:International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/GA1

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Meclee (talk · contribs) 21:00, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1.   Well-written:

       (a) the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct; and
       (b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[5]

I find the article to be clear and concise, grammatical, and in compliance.

2. Factually accurate and verifiable:

       (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
       (b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;[6] and
       (c) it contains no original research.

Article appears factually accurate and is definitely verifiable.

3. Broad in its coverage:

       (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[7] and
       (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Gives good coverage.

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.

   Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.[8]
   Illustrated, if possible, by images:[9]

Un-baised.

       (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
       (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[10]

No suitable images available.

Will await further comments/reviews for 10 days. Meclee (talk) 21:00, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Period passed without further comment. Meclee (talk) 02:01, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]