Talk:Ted Bundy/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:59, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

I peer reviewed this and feel it is close to FA standards and more than meets the GA criteria. For suggestions for improvement, please see Wikipedia:Peer review/Ted Bundy/archive2. I also note that the dab link finder finds one disambiguation link that needs to be fixed. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:05, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Glad to see that a group of editors is working together on improving this article.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Please see the peer review comments on fair use images - I am not sure it would pass FAC with the Utah mug shot and perhaps the fair use photo of one vicitm

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: