Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 11:46, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Is it reasonably well written?
- I'd clarify in the lead that it is considered a "moderate" threat level by the United States Geological Survey.
- Tephra and Pyroclastic rock are wikilinked, though not at their first instances
- You mention 'Volcanic bomb' once and then 'lava bomb' later. Is there any difference between the two? I note that 'Lava bomb' just redirects to Volcanic bomb
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail: Looks really good. Looking forward to passing this once minor issues are addressed. Freikorp (talk) 12:08, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Freikorp, thanks very much for the review! I think I addressed your comments. ceranthor 15:12, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Great work. Passing. :) Freikorp (talk) 23:18, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.