Talk:Shraddha Kapoor/GA1

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

GA Reassessment[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Smauritius 123 12:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC) I will review this Good Article nomination. — Smauritius 123 12:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Smauritius you have been one of the major editors of the article, you cannot be the reviewer of your work and give it a passing grade. see "you can nominate the article on the good article nominations page for an impartial reviewer to assess. " -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:15, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for misbehaving act, I had made a huge mistake, by acting as a reviewer, as i was the major editor of the page, i just want the page to be nominated as a Good article. Smauritius (talk) 15:52, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Early Life and background[edit]

  • Very well written :) No major issues here. Smauritius 123 12:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Career[edit]

  • Very well written :) No major issues here. Smauritius 123 12:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In the media[edit]

  • Very well written :) No major issues here. Smauritius 123 12:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External Links[edit]

  • There are no redirects and dead links. No major issues here. Smauritius 123 12:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

  • All images are copyrighted. No major issues here. Smauritius 123 12:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war[edit]

  • The previous edit was due to age until it was fixed. The page is not in any edit war. No major issues here. Smauritius 123 12:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Overall the article looks pretty good. Smauritius 123 12:09, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  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:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail: