Talk:Holmes' Revelation/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: ChrisGualtieri (talk · contribs) 04:54, 3 January 2014 (UTC) Taking this. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:54, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Good Article Checklist

• Well-written -the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct; and it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
• Verifiable with no original research: it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline; it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines; and it contains no original research.
• Broad in its coverage: it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
• Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.
• Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
• Illustrated, if possible, by images: images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

• Disambig links: OK
• Reference check: 2 issues

1. Detective Conan Part 20 Vol.3 (info) [beinggiza.com] is 404
2. Detective Conan Part 20 Vol.4 (info) [beinggiza.com] is 404

This very well written, but I'd like to see a few sentences to introduce the main characters for readers unfamiliar with the work. The age pills are also a matter that needs more explanation in the second sentence of the plot. The rest of the clues and eventual resolution seems to be good with one minor issue in the last paragraph. It says "revealing Hades plans to kill her" - is it not a singular plan? And if it's "Hades" plan it needs a comma to make it "Hades' plan". Some clarity is needed in the release section, for the second sentence as it is a bit ambiguous. I looked through the other GAN review and I am satisfied that some of the issues have been resolved. Just a few fixes and it should be okay to pass it. Placing it on hold. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 18:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

• Replaced with new Being links.
• I grouped Ran and Kogoro as his caretakers and left the wikilink to explain to the readers
• Expanded on age pill. I thought it was good enough for readers to assume they were magic pills or something
• I replaced plans with intends
• I rewrote the release section

DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 02:33, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Alright, passed. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:40, 7 January 2014 (UTC)