Talk:Beckman–Quarles theorem
 | Beckman–Quarles theorem has been listed as one of the Mathematics good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: April 1, 2023. (Reviewed version). |
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
GA Review
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Beckman–Quarles theorem/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: The person who loves reading (talk · contribs) 16:03, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a. (reference section):
- This article contains many references which I can identify the source.
- b. (citations to reliable sources):
- All reliable sources.
- c. (OR):
- No original research.
- d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
- No close paraphrasing.
- a. (reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a. (major aspects):
- Main aspects are covered.
- b. (focused):
- No unnecessary details.
- a. (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Very neutral.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
- b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Nice image with a suitable caption.
- a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/fail:
- Pass/fail:
(Criteria marked 
are unassessed)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
