Talk:Spongiforma/GA2

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

Reviewer: Rcej (talk · contribs) 08:49, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Very nice! Uno thing:
 * In Ecology, etc., the dab in this sentence leads to a mid-paragraph: "Both species of Spongiforma are known only from their type locations." In article def would be easier to read ;)  Rcej (Robert) –  talk  07:43, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reviewing! Changed to "... from their original collection locations." Anything else? Sasata (talk) 19:47, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Nope ;) It be a pass!  Rcej (Robert) –  talk  06:44, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Results of review

 * GA review (see here for criteria)

The article Spongiforma passes this review, and has been promoted to good article status. The article is found by the reviewing editor to be deserving of good article status based on the following criteria:
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 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:
 * 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: