Talk:Helen Magnus/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: GRAPPLE X 15:31, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


Never heard of Sanctuary, but my younger self religiously tuned in to SG1 for Amanda Tapping...

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    Just a few changes needed
    "The character is over a century and a half old, having been given her advanced longevity from injecting herself with vampire blood." -> should be "by injecting herself"
    "This allowed each member unique abilities." -> Probably should be "granted each member"
    "By the turn of the 20th century, her research with the abnormal population went into full swing and founded the Sanctuary Network." -> "and she founded..."
    "during which she decided to use the embryo an bear her daughter" -> "use the embryo to bear her daughter"
    "Despite this, Magnus believes her life energy might be in the shield buffer." -> I'm not really sure what this means.
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
    MOS is fine.
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
    Citations are grand.
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
    Scope is grand.
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
    Article is neutral.
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
    Images are used well. One is commons, one is fair-use with a solid rationale.
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Just going to hold this until the 1A fixes are sorted, then it should be ready to pass.
Thanks for taking the time to review the article. I believed I have addressed all the issues. -- Matthew RD 16:26, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Reviewed the changes, and I'm passing this one. Well done! GRAPPLE X 21:17, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]