Jump to content

Talk:John Wagner/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: Curly Turkey (talk · contribs) 05:41, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    There are quite a few uncited passages, including at least one full uncited paragraph. Also, sources such as CBDB and GCD are not considered reliable sources, as their content is user-submitted. Those sources would be appropriate under "External links".
    Names of authors cited normally should be cited as last name, first name.
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    Seems to cover all major aspects.
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
    Has Wagner received no criticism? And is "leading light" in the lead really WP:NPOV?
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
  • Issues so far appear to be fixed; is the review done? Wizardman 23:16, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ummm...no, actually. There are still uncited passages, and all of the cited authors are still listed first name, last name. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 23:40, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In that case it should be failed, the writer's had a month to tackle it. Wizardman 01:09, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha. Failed. CüRlyTüRkeyTalkContribs 01:37, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]