The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Nominator: Sammi Brie ( talk · contribs) 04:45, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose ( talk · contribs) 23:07, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | ||
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | All sources seem suitable. | |
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | I reviewed the one non-zero match (3.8%) found using Earwig's Copyvio Detector. Fine per WP:LIMITED. No copyvio/plagiarism issues found during spot checks. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Suitable. | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | No issues. | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | No evidence of lack of stability. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | Both images PD. Rationale for the logo seems reasonable. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Fine. | |
7. Overall assessment. |
Great work as ever, Sammi Brie. I hope the comments above are helpful; I'm happy to discuss any of them. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 19:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Nominator: Sammi Brie ( talk · contribs) 04:45, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose ( talk · contribs) 23:07, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | ||
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | All sources seem suitable. | |
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | I reviewed the one non-zero match (3.8%) found using Earwig's Copyvio Detector. Fine per WP:LIMITED. No copyvio/plagiarism issues found during spot checks. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Suitable. | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | No issues. | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | No evidence of lack of stability. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | Both images PD. Rationale for the logo seems reasonable. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Fine. | |
7. Overall assessment. |
Great work as ever, Sammi Brie. I hope the comments above are helpful; I'm happy to discuss any of them. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk) 19:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)