Jump to content

Talk:David Attenborough/GA2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Trainsandotherthings (talk · contribs) 18:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be reviewing this, hopefully to be done within the day. Comments to come shortly. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]

Lead

[edit]

Life and family

[edit]

First years at the BBC

[edit]

BBC administration

[edit]

Life series

[edit]

Beyond Life on Earth

[edit]

Growing engagement

[edit]

Environment

[edit]

Human population

[edit]

Religious views

[edit]

BBC and public service broadcasting

[edit]

Politics

[edit]

No comments here, well done. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:44, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Honorary titles

[edit]

Recognition

[edit]

Species named after Attenborough

[edit]

Awards

[edit]

Miscellaneous comments

[edit]


GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    All issues resolved. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:09, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    All issues resolved. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:09, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. 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:
    No issues here. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:57, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    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:
    From my checking, the sources are all reliable. I did not go through all 254 individually, this isn't FAC, but I'm taking it on good faith that the remainder are all appropriate. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:01, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    C. It contains no original research:
    Everything is meticulously cited. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:37, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
    No issues, the only things to come up on Earwig were direct quotes, which are all properly attributed. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:58, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    This article has comprehensive coverage of Attenborough. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:57, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
    Everything is relevant to the subject of the article. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:57, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
    Article is neutral. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:57, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
    No issues here, article is stable. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:25, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  6. 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:
    All are appropriately tagged, and used properly. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:00, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
    All images relevant and properly captioned. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:00, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    All criteria are met, and I will be promoting this to GA. Thanks to Lee Vilenski and Femkemilene for their hard work on this article, and congratulations! Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:09, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]