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

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This review is part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force/Sweeps, a project devoted to re-reviewing Good Articles listed before August 26, 2007.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Unreviewed

   B. MoS compliance:

   Introduction is too short. See WP:LEAD for more info.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Large portions of the article are uncited.

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   I only skimmed through the article, so citations might not be the only problem. Prose issues are generally minor, however, missing citations is a major problem and if this is not resolved the article will definitely be de-listed. Article will be placed on hold until issues can be addressed. If an editor does not express interest in addressing these issues within seven days, the article will be delisted. -- ErgoSum• talk• trib 17:02, 31 May 2009 (UTC) reply

I will get around to fixing the article. Dough4872 ( talk) 01:04, 7 June 2009 (UTC) reply

No problem, I actually forgot that I reviewed this one, so I didn't really notify anyone about it. I'll extend the hold time another week. -- ErgoSum• talk• trib 01:38, 7 June 2009 (UTC) reply

I have finished making the requested improvements to the article. Dough4872 ( talk) 21:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC) reply

I'm impressed. Article kept. -- ErgoSum• talk• trib 22:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC) reply