Talk:A Whole Nother Story/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Cloudz679 (talk · contribs) 17:00, 9 February 2014 (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, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   there are basic errors in the prose

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   The article is not adequately referenced

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.:

   the article was only created two days before its nomination

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:

   This article is not close to meeting the Good article criteria. Time should be taken to attribute the text to reliable sources, then improve the prose. A copy edit would be helpful following the work on the text, not before. Nominating the article for GA, two days after creating it, has not been a worthwhile exercise. Please spend time reading the criteria. C679 17:00, 9 February 2014 (UTC)