GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Whiteguru (talk · contribs) 03:54, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Starts GA Review; the review will follow the same sections of the Article.

 


--Whiteguru (talk) 03:54, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Lede

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

Competition overview

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

Origins

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

1950s

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

1960s

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

1970s

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

1980s

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

1990s

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

2000s

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

2010s

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

2020s

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

Notes

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

References

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

Further Reading

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

External Links

  1. Is it reasonably well written?

 


End Matter

  1. Is it is Broad in its coverage?
  1. Is it Verifiable with no original research?
  1. Does the article meet notability guidelines?
  1. Does it follow WP:NPOV Neutral Point of View?
  1. Is it stable?
  1. Top editors are
    * Sims2aholic8
    * Wesley Wolf
    * Mikeagell98
    * Eurosong
    * Daniel Callegaro
  1. It is illustrated by images ?

Overall

Conclusion

 Passed       --Whiteguru (talk) 05:03, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]