Jump to content

Talk:Ars Technica/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 11:49, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found

Link rot: none found


Checking against GA criteria

[edit]
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:
    Well, short and sweet. I can't find anything to pick holes in [even though I tried, really hard! :-)]. This article is well written, well referenced to reliable sources, stable, broad, thorough and focussed, illustration is correctly tagged. An interesting article about one of the first important web magazines. I am happy to list this as a good article. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 12:01, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]