Talk:Phases and Stages/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 15:20, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Does she really "deserted" him or just "left" him? But overall the prose is pretty good; MOS too.

corrected (deserted--->left).--GDuwenTell me! 17:57, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   Please use {{sfn}} template; Replace AllRovi with Rovi Corporation

Done.--GDuwenTell me! 17:57, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

1. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

2. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

3. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

4. 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):

5. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

• ISBN check: ok
• Dabsolver check: ok
• Checklinks check: ok
• Reflinks check: -
• The references are the only issue.
• Promoting good work!--♫GoP♫_T^C_N 11:05, 14 November 2011 (UTC)