Talk:Histoire Naturelle/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Gug01 (talk · contribs) 16:41, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Poor quality check

This article is not of poor quality. It lacks {{citation needed}}, {{POW}}, {{clarify}} and tags of such caliber.

Prose, punctuation, spelling, grammar, capitalization

This article has correct prose. It also has correct punctuation, spelling, grammar and capitalization.

References and plagiarism

This article does not plagiarise and is properly referenced.

Headings

Although this is not part of the good article criteria, I suggest that the Table of Contents is hidden because it covers the page and is hard to navigate. It could also be limited to just one heading. Again, this is not part of the good article criteria but is just a suggestion.

Coverage and point of view

The article broadly covers the subject, with no unnecessary digressions. The article does go into detail where neccessary. This article is written from a very neutral point of view.

Stability

This article is very stable and has a history of no edit wars.

Overview

This article is ready to be a good article. However, I have a few suggestions. One, the table of contents is hidden or limited to one entry. Also, the overwhelming majority of edits is made by one person, and I hope that changes.

Many thanks for the review. I'm sure other people will soon dive in. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:42, 4 January 2015 (UTC)