Talk:Tortilleria/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs/^Vote! 00:00, 11 April 2010 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

   Fails WP:LEAD The hook in this case is not a summary, it introduces a lot of new information.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   "Methods of Production" subsection is not cited. Generally policy is at least one cite per paragraph.

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   Misses many important topics. Where specifically are they located, exactly how prevalent are they, what is their history, what is their cultural significance, is there any other interesting information? Do they ever sell anything else?

   B. Focused:

   Doesn't focus on history or culture, focuses on subsidization, which although interesting isn't really the large issue with them.

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   It needs a ton of expansion to qualify for GA. I will be willing to promote it if such changes occur, but at this point it would most definitely fail because of criteria 3.