Talk:Ever 17: The Out of Infinity/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 13:08, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
I'll have this to you soon. JAGUAR 13:08, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- 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 list corporation:
- A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- 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:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
I've just read through the article and can hardly believe I'm doing this, but I'm giving this an instant pass. If anyone is frowning on this please bear in mind that in my 380 reviews, I've only done this twice. This article is well written, comprehensive and I couldn't find anything wrong with it. Well done! 
JAGUAR 22:07, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Whoa, that's awesome. Thank you!--IDVtalk 22:14, 11 January 2016 (UTC)