Talk:HTC One (M7)/GA1

Latest comment: 11 years ago by Numbermaniac in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Numbermaniac (talk · contribs) 22:46, 5 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

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

I'm seeing this as almost certainly a good article.

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. 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):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

All this needs is some references where the cn tags are added, and the article can be made a GA. -- (T) Numbermaniac (C) 09:58, 7 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Done. ViperSnake151  Talk  18:03, 7 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
That was anazingly quick. Alright, a GA I think this can be! -- (T) Numbermaniac (C) 00:10, 8 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
It is now a GA! -- (T) Numbermaniac (C) 00:16, 8 June 2013 (UTC)Reply