Talk:Webster Sycamore/GA2

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

Reviewer: Maile66 (talk · contribs) 13:35, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * Professional level writing. No copyvio or close paraphrasing found. Spelling and grammar are as they should be.
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * Everything checks out with MOS dictates.
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * Sections for References (citations), Bibliography (appropriately formatted) and External links (3 items only).
 * B. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:
 * A good variety of reliable sources throughout the article.
 * C. No original research:
 * None that I could see.
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * Takes us through the detailed life and death of a notable wonder of nature.
 * B. Focused (see summary style):
 * Absolutely focused in the body of the article, with the lead doing an appropriate summing up of the article.
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * Nominator has been the primary editor, with only two minor edits by one editor and one bot.
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * Cumberland Plateau map is licensed on Commons by the person who created it.
 * Webster Sycamore Webster Springs WV 1920 is licensed appropriately on Commons.
 * File:Webster Sycamore Webster Springs WV 1955 is appropriately noted with "Media data and Non-free use rationale".
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * Images are appropriate to subject, evenly distributed in the article, and have both captions and alt text.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Thank you for providing an opportunity to review an article I found both an enjoyable and informative read. — Maile (talk) 14:00, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
 * , thank you so incredibly much for taking the time to engage in this Good Article review. I appreciate your attention to this article and your continued commitment to Wikipedia! -- West Virginian   (talk)  19:35, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
 * , thank you so incredibly much for taking the time to engage in this Good Article review. I appreciate your attention to this article and your continued commitment to Wikipedia! -- West Virginian   (talk)  19:35, 10 October 2015 (UTC)