GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Czarkoff (talk · contribs) 22:04, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
This section is supposed to be edited only by reviewer(s); please, leave your comments in the Discussion section below.
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
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. | I would note that contrary to Wikipedia's practice several articles are linked from this one more then once. Though I would ordinarily require that second, third and later occasions be unlinked, this article imposes a substantial load on the reader, so repeated links may actually facilitate reading it. Please don't get this comment as a call to further add duplicate links though. |
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. | |
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: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | |
![]() |
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. |
|
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. |
Please refer to the issues in the table above by their numbers (eg. 1a1 for first issue with "prose" criterion).
Notice: I understand that there are certain things that you are looking for and some improvement suggestions would be outside the scope of this GA review. Therefore if you or anyone else feel that there's something specific that needs to be done to further improve the quality of this article, especially if if can be brought really close to FA standards, feel free to open a topic in the Talk page. I would be eager to hear such suggestions and if I couldn't take care of it myself I'm sure others could. Thanks, Jesse V. (talk) 04:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
|at=
Markup | Renders as |
---|---|
((cite news |url=http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/genome/new.html |title=Genome@home Updates |first1=Vijay |last1=Pande |first2=Stefan |last2=Larson |date=2002-03-04 |accessdate=2012-03-17 )) |
Pande, Vijay; Larson, Stefan (2002-03-04). "Genome@home Updates". Retrieved 2012-03-17. |
((cite news |url=http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/genome/new.html |title=Genome@home Updates |at=April 15, 2004 Update |first1=Vijay |last1=Pande |first2=Stefan |last2=Larson |date=2002-03-04 |accessdate=2012-03-17 )) |
Pande, Vijay; Larson, Stefan (2002-03-04). "Genome@home Updates". April 15, 2004 Update. Retrieved 2012-03-17. |