Talk:Reiki/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: MacMedtalkstalk 18:11, 20 March 2011 (UTC) I am planning on starting this review now, I will update this page within an hour or two.
| Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Well-written: | ||
|
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Well written, assuming good faith in that the Japanese/Mandarin characters are grammatically correct. |
|
|
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Matches MoS in structure of sections/lead. |
| 2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
|
|
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | Just find a replacement for ref 77. Done - For some reason, it was saying with a capital 'r' instead of lower-case 'r', which was bringing up the 404.
|
|
|
2b. 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). | |
|
|
2c. it contains no original research. | |
| 3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
|
|
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | I studied reiki in school, and I don't see anything missed that I learned about. I actually learned some additional items here. |
|
|
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Doesn't delve deep into the minutae of the practice, but supplies plenty of information to the reader on all aspects. |
|
|
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | Presents both sides of the argument (reiki does/does not work) and allows the reader to make their own decision. |
|
|
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | Minor debate on certain topics but they stay on the talk page and wait for consensus. No edit warring. |
| 6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
|
|
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | All fair use. |
|
|
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | The image of Hayashi should be in the early development section rather than origins, no? Correct me if I'm wrong. Done - It was placed in that section because there was previously a picture of Takata above him, and the what was then three pictures followed on from each other (Usui, Takata, then Hayashi), but seeing as Takata is now gone, I've moved Hayashi up.
|
|
|
7. Overall assessment. | Waiting for a few minor fixes. Done - Minors updated/corrected by Xxglennxx on 20 March 2011.
|
Additional Points
[edit]- Reference #77 is a dead link. (404)