Talk:Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children/GA3

GA Review

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

Reviewer: NathanWubs (talk · contribs) 20:28, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Planning to review this article tonight. Will take my time as this is my first time reviewing a Gan. So I might finish it up tomorrow. NathanWubs (talk) 20:28, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	The writing is clear and concise. I do not see any major spelling and grammar errors. Prose in plot section is clear. The setting section helps to make the story section better understandable.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Complies with the manual of style guidelines. Lead section is good, not perfect but good.(see FA rec at bottom)
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	There are no neutrality issues with this article. Things that might be challenged are properly sourced. Including the plot section not only using itself as source
	2c. it contains no original research.	Yes, the content of the article abides by the sourcing. No original synthesis found
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	The topics go not in extraneous detail or even mention of details if not written in the article pages and sources themselves.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No edit wars or major changes going on with the article.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	All images have rational to them why they adhere to the fair use policy
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	All images have a point in context of the article and their placing. Captions are concise and factual
	7. Overall assessment.

Waiting for an overview from a mentor if I did things probably. After that I will add my FA recommendations here instead. NathanWubs (talk) 23:18, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Going to offer a second opinion. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 20:42, 8 April 2015 (UTC)