Talk:Connie Talbot's Holiday Magic/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Moisejp (talk · contribs) 06:34, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I'll be reviewing this article for GA in the next few days. Moisejp (talk) 06:34, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Well written.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   The references are all reliable sources. I looked at all of the online ones and the info stated in the article checked out.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   It is satisfactorily broad in its coverage.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Both good and bad reviews included.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   No edit wars. Stable.

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):

   The one image used has a proper fair use rationale.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Rather than bringing up any minor issues here, I made a number of small copy edits to clean them up. There were three dead links, but I replaced one, and the other two didn't seem necessary (see my edit summaries). I am very happy to pass this article. Good job. Moisejp (talk) 16:28, 10 November 2011 (UTC)