Talk:Jenny (Doctor Who)/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Greetings
[edit]Hello, my name is weebiloobil, I will be your reviewer for the forseeable future. If you have any comments during this process, feel free to leave them at User talk:Weebiloobil. As a member of the Doctor Who Wikiproject Assessment Committee, I will be ensuring that this article fully meets the good article criteria. If you have any problems, feel free to ask, and good luck! - Weebiloobil (talk) 09:17, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Review
[edit]GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- Good prose for a difficult subject
- B. MoS compliance:
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- The first 2 sections lack references - just simple ones to the episode itself will do for part of it, and DWM or Radio Times would be alright for her being the daughter of Peter Davison, and the last sentence needs a DWM or BBC reference. The rest of the article is fine
- The lead summarises the whole article, so it doesn't require cites for an uncontroversial article like this. See WP:LEAD. Alientraveller (talk) 16:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
- I was not referring to the lead, but the two first paragraphs of the main body of the article. Forgive me - I should have been clearer. The nominator has since added these references - Weebiloobil (talk) 20:20, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
- The lead summarises the whole article, so it doesn't require cites for an uncontroversial article like this. See WP:LEAD. Alientraveller (talk) 16:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
- The first 2 sections lack references - just simple ones to the episode itself will do for part of it, and DWM or Radio Times would be alright for her being the daughter of Peter Davison, and the last sentence needs a DWM or BBC reference. The rest of the article is fine
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- There appears to have been a recent edit war. Although the article has been fine for about the past month, the issue still feels slightly unresolved. If, by the time this is re-reviewed, no edit wars have taken place, then it satisfies this criterion
- No edit wars, etc:
- 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:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- I am placing this article on hold. I will be back in 48 hrs to read through it again, but sooner if you contact me. If it has not improved in 7 days, it will be failed. Good luck with the improvements - Weebiloobil (talk) 10:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
- Pass or Fail:
- Having reviewed it for a second time, I have to conclude that this does meet the criteria. Of course, there are changes that could be made - for examples, see Rose Tyler - but, at this stage, it fulfills the criteria. Well done, a very good job! However, I am withholding GA-status until after Journey's End (Doctor Who) on Saturday, just in case she makes an appearance ;) The article will remain 'on hold' until about 7pm (UTC) tommorow, and will be granted the status if it remains like this, or improves. Just one more day! - Weebiloobil (talk) 08:30, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- So it's GA. StewieGriffin! • Talk Sign Listen 18:59, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
- Yep - Weebiloobil (talk) 19:03, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
- So it's GA. StewieGriffin! • Talk Sign Listen 18:59, 5 July 2008 (UTC)