Talk:Zoom! (poetry book)/GA1

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Boca Jóvenes in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Boca Jóvenes (talk · contribs) 14:06, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'll review this. Hope to have something for you soon. BoJó | talk UTC 14:06, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Many thanks, I'll aim to get to any comments promptly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:05, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

GA criteria

edit
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):   d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  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.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

I do apologise, Chiswick Chap. I read the article two weekends ago and intended to pass it but I was called away for something urgent and I completely forgot to complete this page. The article is very interesting and well written, completely within scope, good referencing and with no problems I can see. It is an immediate GA pass (that is, it should have been immediate!). Very well done. All the best. BcJvs | talk UTC 06:26, 14 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

I should have included the criteria template earlier so more apologies. The article easily meets all the criteria in my opinion. As I said above, it is well written, it fully complies with the MOS and it presents a good breadth of coverage within scope. Verification is satisfactory and I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the content. Well done. BcJvs | talk UTC 13:11, 14 November 2022 (UTC)Reply