Talk:Tomb of Horrors/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Hi, I am reviewing this article for GA. It is a nice little article. I fixed a few copy editing issues, including informal contractions like "didn't" in the prose, and some punctuation issues.

• I do wonder what a "demi-lich" is if a lich is "an undead creature, a spellcaster".

However, this passes as a GA, without an answer to that.

Final GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): Well written b (MoS): Follows MoS

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable c (OR): No OR

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): Sets the context b (focused): Remains focused on subject

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias: NPOV

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:

Congratulations! —Mattisse (Talk) 01:11, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks! :) BOZ (talk) 01:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Demi-lich, the info can be found here; since it is unreasonable to expect a reader to track that down, I added some explanation to the plot summary portion. BOZ (talk) 01:36, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Great, thanks! -Drilnoth (talk) 02:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)