Talk:Risk parity/GA1

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

Reviewer: SCB '92 (talk • contribs • count ) 12:25, 15 September 2011 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Okay looking article
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * I think it should be written "1950s" not "1950's", the same with other decades; there should be a space after a citation is used ("and then in Europe.[16][22]USA investors"), and a space after a year in brackets is used: "Clifton Group(2011)"; and why are commas like this “ and not like this "? "The Financial crisis of 2007-2010" should possibly be changed to "Late-2000s financial crisis", or have it linked to that but reading the same, otherwise why is the "F" capitalized in "Financial"?
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * no problems here
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * no problems here
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * no problems here
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * no problems here
 * 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):
 * no problems here
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I'm going to put this on hold for now, until the issues are cleared it's a pass