Talk:Chital/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: AmaryllisGardener (talk · contribs) 20:11, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Review

 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Hold
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Drive by comment
I see this was nominated for GA, but it does not fullfill the comprehensiveness criterion, as there is no taxonomy section, and no mention of the two subspecies or what separates them. It would also seem that all info at Sri Lankan axis deer could simply be merged into here. FunkMonk (talk) 21:12, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
 * How could I miss that? I thought for sure it had a taxonomy section. *facepalm* (This is my first GAR) -- Amaryllis Gardener  talk 21:18, 1 January 2015 (UTC)