Talk:Verpa bohemica/GA1

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

Hi, I have examined this article and made a few copy editing changes which you are free to revert. Although short, it covers the subject adequately and passes the GA criteria.

GA review (see here for criteria)

It's a bit terse but the wikilinks help out a great deal. Good job. Congratulations!
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): Well written  b (MoS): Follows relevant MoS guidelines
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable  c (OR): No OR
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): Covers major aspects  b (focused): Remains focused on topic
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias: Neutral
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.: Stable
 * 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: Pass
 * 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: Pass
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: Pass

&mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 01:08, 21 June 2009 (UTC)