Talk:Electric Mud/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 09:27, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

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

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   WEll written, complies with MoS

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Well researched, a good range of reliable sources, assume good faith for off-line sources

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Sufficient detail - I don't suppose that there are figures for subsequent sales. It is still available I see (not necessary for GA status, but might be a useful area to explore for slight expansion).

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):

   One non free image with correct rationale

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Excellent, I remember this album, I shall go and get a copy. I am happy to pass this as a Good Article. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 09:55, 2 April 2010 (UTC)