Talk:The X-Files (film)/GA2

Latest comment: 14 years ago by Jezhotwells in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 02:01, 16 April 2010 (UTC)Reply


I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: I disambiguation fixed.diff

Link rot: no dead links found

Checking against GA criteria edit

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
    The artcile is reasonably well written, and complies sufficiently with the MoS
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
    Refernces to reliable sources, check out ans upport cited statements.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused): {{GAList/check|y
    The article sufficiently covers the subject, without going into un-necessary detail.
  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):  
    Two images used, correctly tagg and captioned.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
    OK, this is good to go. I will list this as a good article. Areas for future development if you wish to go to FAC: A wider range of sources needed, prose could be improved to flow better.Perhaps a little more about world-wide reception. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 12:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)Reply