Talk:Mercury (element)/GA1

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

This article is being reviewed as part of the WikiProject Good Articles. We're doing Sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. This article was awarded GA-status back in 2007, so I will be assessing the article to ensure that it is still compliant.Pyrotec (talk)14:59, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I shall follow and try addressing any comment within a day. Materialscientist (talk) 23:02, 26 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much for volunteering. The main problem is lack of references / in-line citations in some sections; however, I will try and fix some of them as I go along.Pyrotec (talk) 15:10, 27 July 2009 (UTC)


 * You have done a very good job fixing the references, so I'm going to close this review.Pyrotec (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Summary
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 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:

I'm closing off this reveiw and giving this article a "Keep GA" status. Thanks for your considerable efforts in improving the references.Pyrotec (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2009 (UTC)