Talk:Love Kraft/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I have reformatted dates to be consistent. The dates in the cited references should not be wiki-linked, see Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Dates, so I have removed those wiki links. There were also some format errors, which cause 2 separate Guardian article references to be both named Guardian, I separated them to Guardian1 & Guardian2. The article, in my opinion meets the criteria for good article status. I checked against all 6 GA criteria and I think the article meets tehse. I checked all the refrences and they support the ciatations. I have commented at the review page and await a second opinion. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:12, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Jezhotwells - this article is in British English though so I've changed the date format back to day-month-year. Cavie78 (talk) 18:33, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, but originally there were one or two dates in month day year format. At least it is now consistent. Jezhotwells (talk) 03:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

GAN notes

Well-written: (a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct

• The article meets these criteria

(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.

• The article meets these criteria

Factually accurate and verifiable: (a) it provides references to all sources of information, and at minimum contains a section dedicated to the attribution of those sources in accordance with the guide to layout; (b) at minimum, 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; and (c) it contains no original research.

• The article meets these criteria in my opinion

Broad in its coverage: (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail

• The article meets these criteria - broad coverage with sufficient detail to explain the subject.

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias

• The article meets these criteria

Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Illustrated, if possible, by images: (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

• The article meets these criteria, it is stable, no edit wars, etc.

llustrated, if possible, by images: (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

• all criteria met. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:46, 13 March 2009 (UTC)