Jump to content

Talk:Radioland Murders

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleRadioland Murders has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 23, 2009Good article nomineeListed

list of the whole cast

[edit]

its not needed,the people in the movie shouldn't take up more room than the article about the moveie,but i dont care enough to change it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.46.49.98 (talkcontribs) 11:30, November 8, 2007)

Now, here's a great example of WP:SOFIXIT if I've ever seen one. :) Vicenarian (talk) 16:15, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry I already fixed it. LOL! Wildroot (talk) 16:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Radioland Murders/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I am beginning a GA review of this article. Please feel free to leave any comments regarding the review below. Vicenarian (talk) 17:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review Result = PASS

[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


Excellent article, easily passes the GA criteria.

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    Written in a simple, yet articulate prose style. Excellent.
    B. MoS compliance:
    Full compliance with WP:MOS.
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    Good references section.
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    Excellent array of sources, well-cited in article.
    C. No original research:
    None apparent.
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    Good coverage, including the production, the plot, the cast and the release - everything needed for a movie article.
    B. Focused:
    Plot section is short and to the point. Production details and release are informative without being overwhelming.
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
    No NPOV issues.
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
    Very stable, only minor edit recently was correctly reverted for WP:OR.
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    Poster image is tagged with a detailed fair use rationale, in line with use elsewhere on WP.
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
    Good placement in infobox.
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Outstanding work, an example of one of the finest articles Wikipedia has to offer.
Thank you. Wildroot (talk) 23:27, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]