Talk:The Mansion of Happiness/GA1

GA Review

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

Congratulations on the work completed so far. It is a significant improvement from the last major upgrade. There are a few concerns, however, I have in regards to GA status.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   The lead reads a little disjointed, particularly the first sentence. The description of Abbott so early in the introduction is a little distracting - perhaps move into a separate paragraph? Try expanding the lead, and separate the early part of the article under suitable headings. Try WP:LEAD if you are having trouble.

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):

   As mentioned above, the article tends to lose its focus, especially in the lead.

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):

   An alternative caption might be the go, something that describes what it is, (game board, etc). Another image would be nice, but not paramount.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   The prose needs significant improvement in order to meet the 1a requirement. Try contacting a Copyeditor at a relevant WP:TOYS, or at WP:GoCE. A copyedit will not only improve the prose, but will tend to get the article a little more 'focused'. You are not far away from GA quality, keep putting in effort at it won't be far away. :)

\ / (⁂) 00:49, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

I think it is time for a reassessment.

Glubbdrubb (talk) 18:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)