Talk:Mir EO-19

Mir 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
Date	Process	Result
July 8, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Spaceflight Mid‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Russia: Technology & engineering / Science & education Low‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the technology and engineering in Russia task force.
	This article is supported by the science and education in Russia task force.

GA Review

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)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Prose OK, MoS sufficiently complied with
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
References check out, article suitably referenced, no obvious OR
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.

Thanks for sorting this out
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
OK
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
OK
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):
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]