Talk:Appian Way Productions/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 14:46, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I'll take a look at this soon! JAGUAR  14:46, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list corporation:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to 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 tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Initial comments

• "the psychological thriller Shutter Island" - no year given for Shutter Island? (2010)
• Does the company have a logo?
• "Appian Way's following film was released three years later" - what year is this? The prose makes it hard to keep track of the years
• Although considering that the article is short, I would recommend expanding the second paragraph of the lead per WP:LEADLENGTH

Just going to promote this right away. I couldn't find anything that might put it on hold. This is well written, well referenced and compact, thus meeting the GA criteria. Good work with this! JAGUAR  19:04, 21 December 2015 (UTC)