GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: That Ole Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 22:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are loads of prose issues, some of which will be very difficult to fix (such as confusion with Dot and Dotty)

General notes
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Prose needs a lot of work, see above.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): (citations to reliable sources): (OR):
    Perfic'
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): (focused):
    Perfic'
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    Perfic'
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    Stable as.
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Comments above
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
That's great work, congrats, you have a GA. That Ole Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 18:45, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]