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

Reviewer: Arsenikk ^(talk) 23:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC) reply

I am quick failing the article because it does not meet the good article criteria. To pass GAN, an article need be fully referenced, which by far is the case with this article. Entire sections lack referencing, and hardly any parts have it in full. There are numerous {{ fact}} tags.

Other issues:

• The article overuses bullet points, where prose would be more appropriate.
• The "topography" section is filled with trivia.
• The gallery below "flora and fauna" should be removed, particularly since it is not about flora or fauna.
• The "demographics" section has undue weight, and also the "history" section should be shortened. Some other sections are a bit short.
• Most of the references are incorrectly formatted (lack publisher/author, date and accessdate).

Arsenikk ^(talk) 23:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC) reply