Talk:Stapes/GA1

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

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 06:06, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

: The article is well-written and complies with policies on prose, structure, and grammar. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 12:54, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * (a)
 * (b)

: It always pleases me to see such a healthy collection of reliable published sources used by an article, especially when they're frequently cited in the text. Also, there is no evidence of original research in the article. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 12:53, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * (a)
 * (b)
 * (c)

: The article seems to cover all relevant aspects of the topic, and does not incorporate anything which sounds trivial or unnecessary for inclusion. It's left me satisfactorily informed on the subject, I'll add! :) Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 12:50, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * (a)
 * (b)

. While this is, to begin with, not the sort of topic you would generally imagine someone having bias towards/against, I shall still make note that there is no evidence of this taking place, in the text. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 12:49, 23 January 2014 (UTC) . Going as far back as September 2011, nothing in the revision history suggests any edit warring. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 16:59, 20 January 2014 (UTC) : The images used are all validly licensed, and do not violate fair use policies - if it even applied I don't think they'd be in Wikimedia Commons, as they are. Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 12:38, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * (a)
 * (b)

Holy kit and kaboodle, batman! Thanks for your prompt review. I was anticipating having more than a day between nominating and posting a GA nomination (it's been about 2-3 hours!), to iron out the cracks identified in the peer review. Additionally it is New Year's Eve, so I'd be very grateful if you could give me a few days to beautify the article! --LT910001 (talk) 06:13, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for holding off,, I've addressed the PR concerns and the article is now ready for a review. --LT910001 (talk) 08:12, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem; we're good to go! :) Is it the end already? It felt like we were just getting started! (talk) 12:55, 23 January 2014 (UTC)