Talk:Kate Is Enough

Kate Is Enough has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 24, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed
July 22, 2012	Peer review	Reviewed

Current status: Good article

Television: Awake / Episode coverage

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Awake task force (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

United States: Television Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles

GA Review edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kate Is Enough/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dom497 (talk · contribs) 16:58, 23 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
~~See comment section.~~ Good.

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
~~See comment section.~~ Good.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
Good.

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
References included where needed.

C. No original research:
No original research found.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:
All major aspects of the topic have been covered.

B. Focused:
Article remains focused throughout.
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
No bias found.
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
~~Article is somewhat stable, please see comment section.~~ Good enough.
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
All images are tagged correctly.

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Images are provided, appropriate, and have suitable captions.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Pass!

Comments edit

~~"...fighting over a tennis racquet, which Cole broke, which was Rex's", wasn't the tennis racquet Hannah's?~~
The entire casting section of the article needs to be re-written. The entire section is written like this: This person who was cast as this person, this person who was cast as this person, this person who was cast as this person". You use the word "who" too many times and the paragraph (to me) sounds really weird.

I fixed some other issues regarding the wording of the article. The article will be on hold for 7 days to allow improvements to be made as well to see if the article undergoes any major changes. If you have any questions, feel free to leave them here or on my talk page.--Dom497 (talk) 17:22, 23 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

I have addressed and fixed all of the issues. Thank you for the review. TBran dl ey 22:34, 23 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

I have passed the article.--Dom497 (talk) 19:22, 24 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add topic