Talk:Madras Crocodile Bank Trust/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs) 10:02, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Reconrabbit (talk · contribs) 14:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Reconrabbit Thanks for taking it up. Will address the comments as they come! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 15:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I copy-edited some minor things for clarity and grammar last week, and since no one else has started a review I will do it now.

References are formatted correctly. Y
External links appropriate. Y
No copyright violations found, version is distinct from other language Wikipedias. Y

Sources check:

All images are tagged with licenses. Y
Y The infobox and caption states that the location is abbreviated "CrocBank" but this is never stated in the article or with a reference.
Y There are a lot of images, and one of the two pictures of the reptile demonstration building could be removed.

There are no edit wars, content disputes in the article's recent history. No maintenance tags on the article either. Y
Article is written from a neutral point of view, and is not promotional of the topic. Y
Broadly covers relevant information to the subject. Y
Y The information on reptile stock may be too detailed and not generally useful to a reader. Is this kind of list standard in other wildlife conservation area articles?

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. [[MOS:|MoS]] () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed