Talk:McLaughlin Planetarium/GA1

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

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:15, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * I made a minor copy-edit to remove the currently as of 2008 bit. Updates acn be made when / if the building is demolished. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:46, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * I used WP:CHECKLINKS to fix a dead link and other minor fixes. I fixed a cite to geocities.com to a copy of the article archived at Nexis. I replaced a cite to geocities about Geospace Planetarium with a cite to that organsiations' website. All other references check out. Foramts could be tidied for consistency. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:46, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 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:
 * OK, I have no hesitation in confirming the status of this as a Good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, I have no hesitation in confirming the status of this as a Good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I have no hesitation in confirming the status of this as a Good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)