# Talk:Natal red rock hare

This review is transcluded from Talk:Natal red rock hare/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 04:03, 13 September 2017 (UTC)


### GA criteria
Well-written: With a few minor grammatical tweaks, the article complies with MOS policies on grammar, as well as layout and formatting. While you're doing that... (talk) 12:28, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct
(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation
Verifiable with no original research: The article uses a handful of references, all of which are reputable and third-party in origin. It appears to make thorough use of each of them, and there are no signs of original research. While you're doing that... (talk) 12:27, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline
(b) 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)
(c) it contains no original research
Broad in its coverage: It looks as though the article covers all the basic areas of its subject that would be expected of an encyclopedic entry. Adequate coverage, and lack of trivial content. While you're doing that... (talk) 12:25, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic
(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. The article discusses its topic in a completely unbiased manner. While you're doing that... (talk) 12:24, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Looking back as far as January 2014, the article has not suffered from edit warring or any other disruptive behaviour from its contributors in that time. While you're doing that... (talk) 05:24, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: Both images used in the article serve relevant illustrative purposes; one to depict the appearance of the topic species, and the other to provide a visual aide to the species' habitat range. While you're doing that... (talk) 05:22, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content
(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

 The article meets the GA criteria, and passes the test. Congratulations! While you're doing that... (talk) 12:30, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks a ton, Wilhelmina Will, for reviewing it! Adityavagarwal (talk) 13:11, 11 October 2017 (UTC)