Talk:Trap Back/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Morgan695 (talk · contribs) 20:00, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

I made a few edits of some overly superlative language, but this is otherwise a well-written and well-researched article that I'm happy to pass.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
A few pings on Earwigs, they were from quotations and long lists of criminal charges.
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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
In general, a quality article that just needed minor tweaks. Morgan695 (talk) 20:00, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Morgan695! All your changes in wording were clear improvements. Grateful for your keen attention to detail and feedback. —BLZ · talk 21:37, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]