Good articleHH 46/47 has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 22, 2018Good article nomineeListed
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on HH 47. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 5 June 2024).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:32, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:HH 46/47/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 20:11, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Images.

Is stable.

References

Hi, thanks for taking up the review. Ref 5 and 12 are not wikipedia based references but are research article and review article respectively. --AhmadLX (talk) 20:48, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • My apologies. I mistakenly clicked on the journal titles and then failed to engage my brain. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:57, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately that is not possible. VizieR links to specific entries dont work by copy-pasting. One must enter object name (HH47 in this case) in the search box. You can verify this by clicking this link that I have copy-pasted from HH47 entry page. --AhmadLX (talk) 20:48, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you. I have had a play with this source. It seems to give the information for each of HH 46 and HH 47 and not HH 46/47. However, HH 46/47 would clearly split the difference, and the issue is doubtless my inexperience with the source. On balance I shall pass lightly over the question of accessibility. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:57, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Prose.

Done.
Done.
Done. AhmadLX (talk) 21:17, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Clarified.
Done.
Done.
Done.
Elaborated.
Done.
Done.AhmadLX (talk) 13:20, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Density here is number density. I have linked it in the article. Also, units are okay.
  • D'oh!
Thanks for copy editing. Very constructive and useful. I have reversed a couple changes that affected meaning. Thanks. AhmadLX (talk) 07:16, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A fascinating, educational, well written and well referenced article. If you could resolve the issues above we shouldn't be too far from moving it forward. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:11, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for appreciation ;) AhmadLX (talk) 07:16, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
Categories