Talk:Damarchus

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Damarchus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Redtigerxyz (talk · contribs) 12:43, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	The article cites primary sources. WP:SECONDARY references should be used in Wikipedia.
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Pending
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	The relevance to the article needs to be highlighted in the caption.
	7. Overall assessment.	User:Nyctimene, please go through Wikipedia:Good article criteria and expand the article appropriately before nominating any more articles to GA. PS: the article is only 1173 characters.