Talk:Le Règne Animal/GA1

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

Reviewer: Gug01 (talk · contribs) 14:54, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Obvious large mistakes
There are no obvious large mistakes. In addition, this article lacks,  ,  or tags of similar sort.

Punctuation, capitalization, spelling, grammar and prose
The punctuation, capitalization, spelling and grammar is correct. This article talks about the book in good prose.

Lead section
The lead section accurately condenses the article and gives a good, proper introduction communicated through prose.

Referencing and plagiarism
The referencing is correct. There are all reliable sources. The article does not copy text without attributing its source. It doesn't plagiarize at all in any way.

Comprehensiveness
This article is broad and discusses every important part in the book. It is very comprehensive. It occasionally goes into detail, but only because that is necessary.

Point of view
This article is written from a neutral point of view.

Stability
This article is stable, so stable that there is not a single undo in its history.

Overview
This article is great to be a good article. I have a suggestion that is not part of the Good article criteria, but is still valid. Only five users has contributed to this article, and User:Chiswick Chap has made the overwhelming majority of edits. It would be nice if other editors would make lots of edits and help a lot. However, this article is still good article material. This article is perfect to be a good article.


 * Many thanks for the review. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:58, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
 * You welcome! I only did what was right. This article should have been a good article after the first review! Gug01 (talk) 18:29, 2 January 2015 (UTC) Gug 01