Talk:Meet the Quagmires/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 17:52, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
Well done.

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
~~In the Cultural references section, please link "Diehard" and "alien" to their correspondence articles as at the moment they stand out as a disambiguations.~~
I'm not sure what you're referring to as neither one links to a disambig page. Die Hard and Extraterrestrial life are used for both. Gage (talk) 21:43, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I changed both, just did one {{done}} at the bottom to address both of her concerns. CTJF83 chat 21:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My bad. Thank you for helping me out. Gage (talk) 21:47, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Any time. CTJF83 chat 21:48, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Glad this was discussed. ;)
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
There's a couple of refs. that have different url link paths, so you might want to update that.
IGN refs are unchangeable. I've had this problem elsewhere on other articles, and though it shows as that in the toolserver, there isn't any way to fix it, unless you know a way. As it doen't actually redirect. Gage (talk) 21:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, I think Ctjf83 may have fixed whatever you had noticed. Gage (talk) 21:48, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, sorry about the IGN one, I had to do an errand and I just added the "couple of refs" bit, and check.

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:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Not that much to do. If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck!

-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 17:52, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done Changed the 2 emmy links, but the IGN link is the same. CTJF83 chat 19:14, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Guess thats all. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 20:48, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to EVERYONE for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:35, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]