Talk:Ultimate!/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 18:10, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Will take this as requested. JAGUAR 18:10, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguations: No links found.
Linkrot: No linkrot found in this article.
Checking against the GA criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):
b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
- "The 52-song two–compact disc compilation" - CD or compact-disc? The lead uses one whereas the body uses another
- "They enjoyed a string of Top 40 hits, including "For Your Love", "Shapes of Things", and "Over Under Sideways Down"" - this isn't mentioned in the body of the article
- One of the harvrefs have no citations linking to it
- a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- No original research found.
- a (reference section):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- NPOV
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
I had a good read through this and couldn't find anything major enough to put this on hold, so I'll pass it outright. It is well written, comprehensive, and all of the sources check out so it meets the criteria. Good work on this! JAGUAR 10:58, 11 December 2016 (UTC)