Talk:Tom Araya/GA1

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

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:05, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose):
 * b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references):
 * All web links are live; referenced statemenst check out. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * b (citations to reliable sources):
 * All sources appear reliable. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * c (OR):
 * I find no evidence of OR. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is broad in its scope.
 * 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:
 * OK, no problems with this, keep GA status. You may wish to consider updating as there is not much  post 2006. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 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:
 * OK, no problems with this, keep GA status. You may wish to consider updating as there is not much  post 2006. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, no problems with this, keep GA status. You may wish to consider updating as there is not much  post 2006. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, no problems with this, keep GA status. You may wish to consider updating as there is not much  post 2006. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)