Jump to content

Talk:Sherlock Holmes Baffled/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 13:25, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]


I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: None found

Linkrot: One dead link repaired.[1] –– Jezhotwells (talk) 13:32, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria

[edit]
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    I made one minor copyedit.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Can we have ISNs for the books, please?
  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, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    I am going to pass this as GA status, but the artcile could be improved by adding ISBN numbers. –– Jezhotwells (talk)
Thanks very much! Will endeavour to add those ISBNs - might try putting the refs in template format as well. Bob talk 16:27, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]