Talk:Parsnip/GA2

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: Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) 03:09, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

A tasty article, full of flavour

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:
Some of the external links could use access dates. Also, the last one is broken.
Done. They all work for me. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:13, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

B. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:
One "citation required"
New source found. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:13, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
All images are appropriately licensed.

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Thank you for the review. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 21:14, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]