# Talk:AMiBA

This review is transcluded from Talk:AMiBA/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA status and should have the full review up soon. Dana boomer (talk) 15:56, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 
The lead is supposed to be a summary of the entire article, with no original information, and so no sources.  In this article, I would recommend moving all of the information on the contributors to a new section, perhaps named "Contributors", with a brief summary sentence in the lead, something along the lines of "with participation from several other leading universities and institutes."  I would then add a couple more sentences to the lead that summarize the design and construction history of the telescope.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

A very nice article.  I just have a couple of comments regarding the lead and layout of the article, so I am putting it on hold to allow you time to address this.  Drop me a note if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 16:20, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Everything looks good, so I am passing this article to GA status.  Thanks for the quick response, and nice work! Dana boomer (talk) 19:09, 23 October 2008 (UTC)