Talk:The Gathering Storm (novel)/GA1
Latest comment: 13 years ago by Rehevkor in topic GA Review
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:44, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Ha, I've read this and will review. I will make straightforward copyedits as I go. I'll jot queries below. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:44, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- ...
it also addresses his struggle with his sanity following the events of the series- should specify (briefly) the events. Reads too vague as is.
- ...
embellishing on Sanderson's deliberations as discussed here would be good too.- I'll try and give this a shot. It's already cited several times in the article, I'll see if I can wean some more out of it. Яehevkor ✉ 17:05, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- Good. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:25, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- I'll try and give this a shot. It's already cited several times in the article, I'll see if I can wean some more out of it. Яehevkor ✉ 17:05, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
one of the source pages mentions Jordan giving a verbal "gleeman-like" 2.5 hours telling of the conclusion to his wife and cousin Wilson - this'd be good to add. It'll be somewhere on the blog in '07-08 I think.- Seems to be this, I'll try and find a way to incorporate that later today. Яehevkor ✉ 12:17, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- I have incorporated it into the article. Not sure it flows too well, any other input welcome. Яehevkor ✉ 17:02, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- I'll have a go at massaging it in. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:25, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- Actually it's ok. Just took a comma out. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:39, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- I'll have a go at massaging it in. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:25, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- I have incorporated it into the article. Not sure it flows too well, any other input welcome. Яehevkor ✉ 17:02, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- Seems to be this, I'll try and find a way to incorporate that later today. Яehevkor ✉ 12:17, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
1. Well written?:
- Prose quality:
- Manual of Style compliance:
2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:
- References to sources:
- Citations to reliable sources, where required:
- No original research:
3. Broad in coverage?:
- Major aspects:
- Focused:
4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:
- Fair representation without bias:
5. Reasonably stable?
- No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):
6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:
- Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
- Pass or Fail: One last thing, just fix up the refs as I have done with making teh accessdates look nice? Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:41, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
- I think all the dates should be consistent now. Thank you very much for the copy edit and review! LxRv (a.ka. Rehevkor) 15:37, 9 August 2011 (UTC)