Talk:Down a Dark Hall/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Abryn (talk · contribs) 03:44, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Overall, a very good article. Just have a few things I would like to see.

Perhaps add a little more to the lead about its background? For example, the feminist issue sounds interesting.

I went ahead and added that to the lead. Fearstreetsaga (talk) 01:09, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A couple sentences in the Reception section could be paraphrased.

I paraphrased the one quote from The New York Times. Fearstreetsaga (talk) 01:09, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any information on the sales for the book, or box office results for the film?

I couldn't find any information about the sales for the book. I did however find box office results, so I included them in the article. Fearstreetsaga (talk) 01:09, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, BOM, of course. I could have just as well added that myself, haha. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 10:08, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One link redirects to a different website (I'm guessing it was a name change). It was DVD Talk, which is now Top Seven Reviews (I'm not sure if it's reliable however). There's also at least one dead link, though I have since archived the sources.

I can't find the reference you're referring to. What's the title of the article? Fearstreetsaga (talk) 01:09, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Abryn: Thanks for reviewing the article, it's really appreciated. How does it look now? Fearstreetsaga (talk) 01:09, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, sorry I didn't get back to you sooner. I dunno what the heck I was thinking, I must have gotten my wires crossed and mistook a source from another article as being from this one. Many apologies! The article looks good, nice job on this. I'm ready to pass. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 10:08, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]