Talk:Taylor series/GA1

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

Reviewer: Tarret  ''talk 16:16, 12 May 2011 (UTC)


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


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Seems to clearly conform to WP:MSM, and has a style that is consistent with similar articles that are GA-class
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Key areas such as the "History section" have citations. In the long-term the paragraph starting "Uses of the Taylor series..." under the section Analytic function and the section called Taylor series as definitions may eventually require a citation as although this may be common knowledge to a person studying the topic, the common person may still benefit from being able to verify these claims should this article eventually be submitted for a WP:FA. (See WP:SCG)
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * I will assume that the Mathematics Wikiproject (or an Mathematics expert) can confirm that this article has all the major aspects.
 * 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:
 * Keep up the good work on this article.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Keep up the good work on this article.