Talk:A Month in the Country (film)/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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 Production section, un-link "August 18, 1986", per here.
Half-check. Alright, the date was un-linked, but you would have to fix this ---> "August 18th 1968" to ---> "August 18, 1986", per here. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 19:14, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Check. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 19:12, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
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:

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:
If the following statements can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 21:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, I've delinked the dates (I don't usually link them myself, I think somebody else must have!) Bob talk 22:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, after reading the article, I have gone off and passed the article. Congratulations. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review. Thank you to Bob who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 19:12, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Bob talk 20:32, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]