Talk:Smoothtooth blacktip shark/GA1

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

Reviewer: AustralianRupert (talk · contribs) 04:20, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status. AustralianRupert (talk) 04:20, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Technical review

 * a (Disambiguations): b (Linkrot)  c (Alt text)
 * no dabs found by the tools;
 * ext links work;
 * images lack alt text. It is not a GA requirement, but you may consider adding it in (it doesn't affect the review).

Criteria

 * It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * No major issues, the prose seems relatively easy to understand to a lay person and the meaning seems clear.
 * No major MOS issues that I can see.


 * It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * all paragraphs/sentences are cited;
 * sources appear to be reliable within the definition of WP:RS and indeed seem definitive, although I am a lay person on this subject;
 * I don't believe that there has been any original research.


 * It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * given that very little is known about the species, I believe that this article incorporates all major aspects of thhe topic without losing focus;


 * It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
 * No issues.


 * It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * there has been a bit of recent editing activity, but nothing amounting to an edit war.


 * It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
 * a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales):  d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:
 * No issues.


 * Overall:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * I believe this article meets the GA criteria and as such I have passed this review. Good work to all those who have contributed. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 05:24, 11 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review. -- Yzx (talk) 05:38, 11 December 2011 (UTC)