Talk:Histoire Naturelle/GA1
GA Review[edit]
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Gug01 (talk · contribs) 16:41, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
Poor quality check[edit]
This article is not of poor quality. It lacks {{citation needed}}, {{POW}}, {{clarify}} and tags of such caliber.
Prose, punctuation, spelling, grammar, capitalization[edit]
This article has correct prose. It also has correct punctuation, spelling, grammar and capitalization.
References and plagiarism[edit]
This article does not plagiarise and is properly referenced.
Headings[edit]
Although this is not part of the good article criteria, I suggest that the Table of Contents is hidden because it covers the page and is hard to navigate. It could also be limited to just one heading. Again, this is not part of the good article criteria but is just a suggestion.
Coverage and point of view[edit]
The article broadly covers the subject, with no unnecessary digressions. The article does go into detail where neccessary. This article is written from a very neutral point of view.
Stability[edit]
This article is very stable and has a history of no edit wars.
Overview[edit]
This article is ready to be a good article. However, I have a few suggestions. One, the table of contents is hidden or limited to one entry. Also, the overwhelming majority of edits is made by one person, and I hope that changes.
- Many thanks for the review. I'm sure other people will soon dive in. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:42, 4 January 2015 (UTC)