Talk:Foster Loyer/GA1

Latest comment: 1 year ago by 1TWO3Writer in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: 1TWO3Writer (talk · contribs) 09:35, 21 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Part of August 2023 backlog.

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
  1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
  1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
  2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. Changed Notes (more commonly used grouping explanatory notes) to References, made reflist into two columns for accessibility. No other issues.
  2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). Page needed tags in Redshirt season (2022–23) valid.
  2c. it contains no original research. Quick-fail: WP:QF states that if a page contains valid clean-up banners, it is to be quickfailed. The discussion here and here has led me to conclude the banner in Redshirt season (2022–23) is valid. Speculation on what future info on a BLP, even if rationalized from current data, is WP:OR and in this page, the nominator did not comment their opinion in 4 months, which either means they agree or disagree but did not follow up.
  2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. Does not seem to violate copyvio.
3. Broad in its coverage:
  3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
  3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Last edit not mine is from over a month ago.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. No images.
  6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. No images.
  7. Overall assessment.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.