Jump to content

Talk:Mir EO-19: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
passing as GA, update banners
GimmeBot (talk | contribs)
m Bot updating {{ArticleHistory}}
Line 1: Line 1:
{{ArticleHistory
{{GA|00:15, 8 July 2011 (UTC)|topic=Natural sciences|page=1|oldid=438327235}}
|action1=GAN
|action1date=00:12, 8 July 2011
|action1link=Talk:Mir EO-19/GA1
|action1result=listed
|action1oldid=438327235
|currentstatus=GA
|topic=Natural sciences
}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Spaceflight|class=GA|importance=Mid|HSF=yes|HSF-importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Spaceflight|class=GA|importance=Mid|HSF=yes|HSF-importance=Mid}}

Revision as of 07:10, 8 July 2011

Good articleMir EO-19 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
July 8, 2011Good article nomineeListed

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Mir EO-19/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 23:42, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Thank you for your review. Tyrol5 [Talk] 00:04, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:43, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Prose OK, MoS sufficiently complied with
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    References check out, article suitably referenced, no obvious OR
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Could do with a mention of how Soyuz TM-21 had arrived at Mir
 Done Added mention/ref to address this concern.
  1. Thanks for sorting this out
  2. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    OK
  3. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    OK
  4. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  5. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Just one point above to be addressed. On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:53, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, all is in order, I am happy to list this now. Congratulations. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:12, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]