Talk:Ducie Island/GA2

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: – Quadell ^(talk) 17:42, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator: User:GDuwen

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.	Very well written.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Good lede, good infobox, good organization.
	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.	The references section is well formatted.
	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).	Sourcing seems good. In my spotchecks, the cited sources back up statements made, and I detected no close paraphrasing.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Not a problem.
	3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	There's no info on "Demographics of Ducie Island" or "Sports in Ducie Island", but I guess that's appropriate.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Not a problem.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Not a problem.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Not currently a problem.
	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.	All images free and correctly tagged. It's a nice bonus that the images of birds were actually taken on the island itself.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Captions and placement are appropriate.
	7. Overall assessment.	Passes all GA criteria

1a nitpick: "It resembles a long, thin sausage in shape." It doesn't look like a sausage to me, and I don't think that's the most encyclopedic way to put it. How about "Very long and thin, the islet is largely forested..."?

1b suggestion: According to WP:LEAD, the lede should summarize all sections of the article without giving any information not included elsewhere. As such, it does not need citations; instead, the facts can be cited in the body of the article where they are given in detail (as they are). Consider removing citations from the lede.

6b suggestion: Consider captioning the infobox photo "NASA photograph of Ducie Island" instead of "NASA picture of Ducie Island", because it's not immediately obvious it's a photograph.

There's really very little I can find to suggest for improvement. – Quadell ^(talk) 19:12, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All the suggestions are assessed.--GDuwenTell me! 20:12, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, well done. – Quadell ^(talk) 20:29, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]