Jump to content

Talk:The Possum/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: AdamBMorgan (talk) 00:07, 11 April 2010 (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:
    TV Squad is a blog, which are not normally acceptable as references. You will need to prove why this case is exceptional, find a different source or remove the reference and associated lines from the article before becoming a Good Article. The nanny-cam-bear item seems the only important one of the three that use this reference; however, the blog doesn't even actually state that it is a reference, only suggests that it might be. (The LA Times blog entries are OK because of the notability of the LA Times itself.)
    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:
    The only problem I see with the article is the TV Squad reference. Everything else seems fine.