Talk:Victory Road (2004)/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

Hi, I am reviewing your article for GA. I went through it, copyediting it some. The article seems very good. There was one sentence I did not understand:

  • "Afterward, Jarrett retrieved the championship..."

Mattisse (Talk) 16:43, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Final GA review (see here for criteria)

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): Well written b (MoS): Follows MoS
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable c (OR): No OR
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): Sets the context b (focused): Remains focused on subject
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias: NPOV
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

A good, clear article! Passes GA. Congratulations! —Mattisse (Talk) 01:51, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it is good to have TNA's first PPV under GA status.--WillC 09:00, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]