Talk:Kitefin shark/GA1

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

I am reviewing this article for GA. It is excellent in every way. I have read it through several times for enjoyment.

GA review (see here for criteria)

Congratulations! (Only question is why is it called "kitefin"?)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): Clearly and concisely written b (MoS): Follows relevant MoS guidelines
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): Comprehensively referenced b (citations to reliable sources): References are to reliable sources  c (OR): No OR
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): Covers the major aspects  b (focused): Remains focused on topic
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias: NPOV
 * 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: Pass
 * 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: Pass
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: Pass
 * Thanks! I have no idea why it's called the kitefin shark. -- Yzx (talk) 19:58, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

&mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 19:29, 20 June 2009 (UTC)