Talk:Kepler-9c/GA2

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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 12:02, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 12:02, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

My way of reviewing WP:GAN's is to read through the article once and then go through it again in more detail, starting at the first section going through to the end and then reviewing the WP:Lead last.

The first statement that caught my eye was in the WP:Lead: "During the time it was observed by the spacecraft, the planet's orbit, which lasts on average approximately 38 days, shortened by 39 minutes every "year" because of this effect." and I flagged that as a possible "grammar problem". Was Kepler-9c watched for one year, or should it have read "...shortened by an average of 39 minutes per year because of this effect"?

I've now decided that the sentence contains a "clever play" on words, its not an (earth) year of 365.25 days, its the time taken to orbit Kepler-9 (a "year"). I will award GA status once this point is properly addressed. Pyrotec (talk) 14:08, 27 February 2011 (UTC)


 * ✅ It has been addressed. --Starstriker7(Talk) 17:33, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Its now a GA. Pyrotec (talk) 20:33, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Overall summary
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

At this point I'm putting the review On Hold, its a good article and will be a Good Article once the WP:Lead has been addressed. Pyrotec (talk) 14:08, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm awarding this article GA-status. Congratulations on producing an interesting and readable article. Pyrotec (talk) 20:32, 27 February 2011 (UTC)