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

Reviewer: Viriditas (talk · contribs) 03:02, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   Summary style sections still require sources per the GA criteria, especially for statistics. The "Immigration" section is unsourced, as is the prose in the "Ethnic groups and languages" section and the large second paragraph of the "Kurds" section. There is quite a bit that in addition that is currently unsourced, plus at least one citation needed tag in the "Roma people" section. Viriditas (talk) 03:09, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

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 tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Quick-failed due to lack of critical sourcing. Please have the relevant WikiProject do a peer review and re-nominate. Viriditas (talk) 03:18, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]