Talk:Diaphoneme/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: -- Cirt (talk) 06:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC) I will review this article. -- Cirt (talk) 06:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Successful good article nomination
[edit]I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of May 21, 2011, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?: Indeed, quite well written. However, I would note there are a few places with long sentences, and run-on sentences. Could use a bit of coypediting, from third party previously uninvolved users, with this in mind, going forward. I would suggest doing this, under the process of the Peer Review. Passes here.
- 2. Factually accurate?: Duly cited throughout, copiously, to WP:RS sources. Passes here.
- 3. Broad in coverage?: Yes, quite thorough, covering multiple different aspects of the subject matter - in a clear and concise structure. Passes here.
- 4. Neutral point of view?: Neutral tone throughout, no issues here. Passes here.
- 5. Article stability? Upon inspection of article edit history and talk page, no outstanding issues with stability. Passes here.
- 6. Images?: No images used in article, thus no problems, nothing to evaluate. Passes here.
If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations.— -- Cirt (talk) 02:56, 21 May 2011 (UTC)