Talk:Delayed gratification/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: CabbageX (talk · contribs) 21:08, 6 December 2012 (UTC) Initiated review on 7/12/2012. CabbageX (talk) 21:08, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
The lead section represents a good overview of the article. The language is objective, and hedges where necessary.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
The references used in this article represent a comprehensive overview of the topic, and are mostly from peer-reviewed publications. However, the Psychoanalytic drives and impulses requires references to support the statements.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
This article appears to provide a broad view of the topic, with necessary amount of detail.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
The tone is neutral, and in some sections, both sides of an argument are represented fairly.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
The second image does not have a copyright tag.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
The previous reviewer failed the nomination for lack of a lead section, issues with references, and problems with the writing. This submission has mostly fixed those problems. The submission is on hold, pending a second opinion from the original reviewer, and an improvement for the two issues mentioned above.

CabbageX (talk) 00:37, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]