Talk:Ursa Minor/GA1

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

Reviewer: StudiesWorld (talk · contribs) 00:59, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Criteria
 Good Article Status - Review Criteria   		A good article is&mdash;  :
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).

:
 * (a) ;
 * (b) ; and
 * (c).

:
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).

. . :
 * (a) ; and
 * (b).



Review
 <li>:</li>

<li>:</li>

<li>:</li>

<li>.</li>

<li>.</li> <li>:</li>

</ol>

Discussion
Please add any related discussion here.
 * I consider the pages of the book reference (Wagman) as Citing_sources. I am unhappy with parenthetical referencing as a whole as it adds to page clutter. I prefer as is but I can combine both book refs into one ref with the two pages listed. Do you feel I need to do that. It's not a real bother. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:33, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree with you that it does add to the clutter. While it is not necessarily required for passage that would definitely be a helpful change. StudiesWorld (talk) 10:44, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * ok  - I have done it now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:52, 3 June 2015 (UTC)