Talk:Smashburger/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: TenPoundHammer (talk · contribs) 23:22, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

This is a very well written article all around. I'm fascinated by retail and fast food history, and I found this article highly informative and well-presented.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   I did a couple minor fixes to remove some grammar and formatting errors.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   Very extensively sourced. I saw no citation errors or unreliable sources at all.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   I feel that the article gives a very thorough description of the chain's history, especially given how new a chain it is overall.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I could see this being a potential FA one day. Again, very well written article all around.