good Article Criteria

A good article does not have to meet the more demanding featured article criteria.

The six good article criteria are the only aspects that should be considered when assessing whether to pass or fail a GAN. Other comments designed to improve the article are encouraged during the review process but should not be mandated as part of the assessment.

Immediate failures

An article may be failed without further review (known as a quick fail) if, prior to the review:

1. It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria
2. It contains copyright violations
3. It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include {{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags (See also {{QF}})
4. It is not stable due to edit warring on the page
5. It has issues noted in a previous GA review that still have not been adequately addressed, as determined by a reviewer who has not previously reviewed the article

In all other cases, the nominator deserves a full review against the six criteria. For most reviews, the nominator is given a chance to address any issues raised by the reviewer before the article is failed. Often the nomination is brought up to standard during the review.

The six good article criteria

 

A good article is:

1. Well-written:
   1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
   2. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
   1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
   2. 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);
   3. it contains no original research; and
   4. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
   1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
   2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
   1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
   2. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

• Stand-alone lists, portals, sounds, and images: these items should be nominated for featured list and featured picture status, if applicable.
• Disambiguation pages and stubs: these pages cannot meet the criteria.
• Featured articles: a good article loses its status when promoted to a featured article. Accordingly, demoted featured articles are not automatically graded as good articles and must be reassessed for quality.

• Wiki: Good article nominations/Instructions—step-by-step instructions on how to handle the GA process
• Wiki: Nominating good articles—advice for nominating an article for GA status
• Wiki: Reviewing good articles—guidelines for reviewing an article for GA status
• Wiki: WikiProject Physics/Quality Control/Reviewing Cheatsheet—useful suggestions for GA review
• Wiki: What the Good article criteria are not—GA reviews should be concluded only in accordance with the GA criteria, not personal preferences
• Wiki: Compare criteria Good v. Featured article
• Wiki: Did you know eligibility criteria—within 7 days of promotion, a GA article may be nominated for a DYK hook review
• Wiki: Featured article criteria—setting your sights on FA criteria may help with the GA review process