Talk:Kauri gum/GA1

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

Reviewer: Tarret  ''talk 19:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)


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


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Well written and easy to follow and understand.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Of the information given the article has enough sources.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Article seems to have then main ideas about the topic well explained, well organized into a logical order.
 * 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, 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:
 * Overall this is an interesting article, but remember that this article isn't complete yet. To become an article of FA-class, this article can greatly benefit from a section about the modern uses of Kauri Gum (Gum collecting perhaps?). Otherwise great work on this article and if possible come by WP:GAN and review an article.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Overall this is an interesting article, but remember that this article isn't complete yet. To become an article of FA-class, this article can greatly benefit from a section about the modern uses of Kauri Gum (Gum collecting perhaps?). Otherwise great work on this article and if possible come by WP:GAN and review an article.