Talk:The Lucky Shot/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 12:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
I'll read through this now and will finish this soon JAGUAR 12:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguations: No links found.
Linkrot: No linkrot found.
Checking against GA criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):
b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
- I would strongly recommend cutting the lead into two paragraphs to make the lead more balanced
- I think the lead focuses too much on the plot and not enough is mentioned about the production/reception (whatever it covered on it anyway!)
- a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- a (reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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 fair use rationales):
b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
As before, this one meets the GA criteria so I'll promote it now. Well done JAGUAR 15:28, 29 May 2015 (UTC)