Talk:Terry Pratchett/GA1

GA Reassessment

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

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:37, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
Well written , conforms sufficiently with MoS. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:46, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
I repaired some reference links using WP:CHECKLINKS. Ref #78 [1] appears to be a dead link. I have commented it out as I cannot find a replacement source. All other references check out. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
OK, I am more than happy to confirm the status of this as a WP:Good article. I believe this could be taken to WP:FAC. There may be some quibbles about some of the sources, but they are sufficient for GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:33, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]