Talk:Iguana Girl/GA1
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Link20XX in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Link20XX (talk · contribs) 20:09, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
I'm going to review this one too. Link20XX (talk) 20:09, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
@Morgan695: I have completed my initial review. Just needs a few things before it can be promoted:
Checklist
edit- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those 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:
- C. It contains no original research:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images 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:
Comments
editLede and infobox:
- The genres in the infobox need to be sourced.
- Done.
Production:
- To resolve her familial trauma, sought to create a manga series that would allow her to make peace with her parents something about this sentence doesn't make sense, maybe add "she" or "Hagio" after the comma.
- Revised.
- The Anime News Network article on Fantagraphics' licensing of the series doesn't say they released it in 2010 specifically, just that they licensed it
- Additional soruce added.
Reception:
- In source 21 and 22, Natasha, Inc needs to be tagged as the publisher to Comic Natalie. Source 22 also needs to be tagged as a Japanese language source.
- Done.
That is all. Address them and I will pass it. Link20XX (talk) 21:07, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Link20XX: Response above. Morgan695 (talk) 22:10, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Morgan695: Changes are sufficient. I have promoted the article and closed this review as Pass. Congratulations! Link20XX (talk) 22:20, 19 May 2021 (UTC)