Talk:Wasp/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Gug01 (talk · contribs) 18:44, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Will start shortly.

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	In the "Diversity" section, is the Pompilidae part of the Braconidae or not? The wording is confusing. Thanks, clarified. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:31, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	The "Fossil" section needs to be expanded. Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:39, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply] Also, the "As pollinators" section should be expanded. Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:13, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply] In fact, the sections "As Pests", "In horticulture", "In sports" and "In fashion" all need to be expanded. As pests: More on dangers. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:17, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply] Good work on the "As pests" and "In horticulture" sections. Gug01 (talk) 16:03, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply] In horticulture: Added a bit more. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:51, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply] In sports: Found a little more. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:23, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply] Not sure there's much to add on the "In fashion" section. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:36, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply] Ok. Gug01 (talk) 16:01, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Thanks for the review. Chiswick Chap was so quick off the mark that I did not have time to respond to the points you raised. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:01, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from me too. They were mainly in the sections I'd worked on. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:12, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]