Talk:Geastrum pectinatum/GA1

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

Hi, this is a good article, as it meets all the GA criteria. I altered one wikilink, relinking it to another word, as it redirected to the opposite meaning. That's it! &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 20:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

This is an excellent article on the subject. Congratulations!
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): The article is very well written in prose that takes some concentration but given that, it is clear. b (MoS): Follows MoS
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable  c (OR): No OR
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): Covers all the major areas b (focused): Remains focused on the topic
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias: Neutral
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.: Stable
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

&mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 20:45, 12 June 2009 (UTC)