Talk:Tyrion Lannister/GA1

Latest comment: 9 years ago by Jaguar in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 22:10, 6 February 2015 (UTC)Reply


I'll complete this within a day or two Jaguar 22:10, 6 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:  
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:  
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:  
    B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:  
    C. No original research:  
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:  
    B. Focused:  
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:  
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:  
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  

Initial comments

edit
Thanks, I will address the issues you mention and see what you think. I thought the Dana Jennings quote was a good introduction/summary of the character and his popularity for that section but I agree with your instincts, I'll try to use it a little differently there and move the more complimentary bits to the recog section. As far as the merchandising, it seems as though this character has more than most others in the series as a direct reflection of his popularity, but I don't know that there's a source that will back me up on that. I did toy with the idea of putting it in prose but at this point it would be just as flat as a list, and lists are acceptable within articles, albeit not preferred. I'll take a look at the citations in that area and see what I can do. Also, I hadn't noticed that someone had messed with the family tree template so it was displaying at the bottom of the article and disrupting the nav template. I've fixed it, and restored it to this article, but do you think this is the best way to display it? Thanks again.— TAnthonyTalk 18:27, 7 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

References

edit

On hold

edit

I like this article, it already passes the "broad in coverage" criteria and is looking pretty comprehensive as it is. The only problem standing in its way are some organisation issues along with some prose issues, but other than that it is pretty solid. I'll leave this on hold for seven days. Thanks! Jaguar 16:30, 7 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

OK, I tried to address these issues, let me know what you think.— TAnthonyTalk 04:54, 13 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Close - promoted

edit

Thank you for your changes to the article, it now meets the GA criteria. The lead has been expanded and now summarizes the article, with the body being comprehensive and broad. Well done   Jaguar 20:07, 13 February 2015 (UTC)Reply