Talk:Michael J. Fox/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: I will be reviewing this article. I am on vacation until Sept 5 so this review could take an upwards of 14 days. Joe Gazz84^user•_talk•^contribs•_{Editor Review} 00:33, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Quick Fail Criteria

1. Has reliable sources
2. Is written neutrally
3. No valid cleanup tags
4. Is relatively stable with no edit wars
5. Not specifically concerned with a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint

The article passes quick fail criteria. A more detailed review will follow. --Joe Gazz84^user•_talk•^contribs•_{Editor Review} 00:40, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Main Review Criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

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 (references): 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, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: --Joe Gazz84^user•_talk•^contribs•_{Editor Review} 03:24, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Template was placed. More Info to come. --Joe Gazz84^user•_talk•^contribs•_{Editor Review} 02:53, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Hold Reasons

1. Article has many tables and not much text therefore gets the major aspects but not the full focused aspects; for this reason I am uncomfortable with the MOS decision of this article. I have marked that as outside of my comfort zone and my request a secomd opinion when I return from my vacation. Update: I have decided to not request second opinion because of the major fix. This will just take slightly longer. You can ask me to file a second opinion request. --Joe Gazz84^user•_talk•^contribs•_{Editor Review} 22:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
2. I am undecided on the Original Research Policy. I will investigate more on that later on. Please do not worry about that now.  Done ^{Done added by Joe Gazz}

Final comments on hold review: Mainly focusing. Article has 7 days. I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow editors to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. Please add the template {{done}} next to the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Thank you. Joe Gazz84^user•_talk•^contribs•_{Editor Review} 03:29, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

I believe the article meets GA status and would be delighted to see it achieve that. My thanks to yourself Joe for your helpful review. I do not think it requires a second opinion Monkeymanman (talk) 19:58, 9 September 2010 (UTC)