Talk:Somari/GA1

Latest comment: 7 years ago by Jd22292 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Jd22292 (talk · contribs) 18:31, 4 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:  
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:  
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:  
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:  
    The only concerning reference is the first reference, which cites "Someri Team", a primary source in this case.
    C. It contains no original research:  
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:  
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:  
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):  
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:  
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:  
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:  
    The image of Green Hill Zone in the game, though its rationale is clear, needs a {{Non-free image rationale}} template with more information.
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  
    2b can be addressed as per WP:LEADCITE, the lead and infobox are supposed to provide an accurate summary of the prose, and thus no citations are needed here. However, 6a is a red flag here. This needs to be addressed in a week or the review will fail. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 18:31, 4 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
Thank you also for responding quickly to the concerns. This article has passed and is now a Good Article.   Congratulations! jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 21:39, 4 September 2017 (UTC)Reply