Talk:Émile Durkheim/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects: Satisfied that there is sufficiently broad coverage

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc: No evidence of edit wars

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: All images have an appropriate tag and are either out of copyright or licensed under CC

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: All images have a suitable caption

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Reviewer: Pi (Talk to me! ) 00:32, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to take a break. I'll be back to finish this in a bit.

The reviewer hasn't edited in a month, so a new one will need to be found. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 15:39, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 21:07, 29 May 2011 (UTC)