Talk:The Impossible Astronaut/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ruby2010 comment! 15:56, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I will review soon. Ruby2010 comment! 15:56, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

• A few minor reverts, nothing to get too worried about

2. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

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

3. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Most of the article looks great. The only issue are the references. Make sure all have dates, access dates, and publishers. Also, websites with no print publications should not be italicized (such as Digital Spy). I'll place the review on hold while this gets sorted. Thanks, Ruby2010 comment! 22:15, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I think I'm done. Thanks for the review. -- Matthew RD 20:13, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Is BBC considered a print source? It's italicized several times. Ditto with BBC News Online, MTV, Radio Free Skaro. Glimmer721 ^talk 22:01, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks Glimmer for stepping in here. I also made a few ref formatting changes myself. The article now looks great. Pass for GA. Nice work Matthew, and keep up the good work! Ruby2010 comment! 04:33, 9 June 2011 (UTC)