GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:28, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]


I'll take a look at this and copyedit as I go (please revert if I accidentally change the meaning), and jot queries below. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:28, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Updated. Hmlarson (talk) 01:24, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Updated. Hmlarson (talk) 01:24, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Updated. Hmlarson (talk) 01:24, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Updated. Hmlarson (talk) 01:24, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Updated. Hmlarson (talk) 01:24, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Expanded. Hmlarson (talk) 20:52, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Expanded and moved under In Popular Culture header. Hmlarson (talk) 20:52, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Updated. Hmlarson (talk) 01:24, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Updated. Hmlarson (talk) 01:24, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Updated.Hmlarson (talk) 06:34, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Updated.Hmlarson (talk) 06:34, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, looks good. Am trying to give it a big a shove as possible towards FAC. It'd be great to get this on the mainpage. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:53, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In Progress

[edit]

Hmlarson (talk) 06:47, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Casliber: I'm done with this round of updates if you are able to take a look. Thank you. Hmlarson (talk) 21:11, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


1. Well written?:

Prose quality:
Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:
Citations to reliable sources, where required:
No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:
Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:


Overall:

Pass or Fail: - great, well done. I feel it is within striking distance of FA-hood, if you want to take it to FAC. Only slight quibble is I feel the photo of her taking the corner would be better for the infobox but it's not a big deal...just a great photo. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:34, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reviewing Casliber. I've swapped a couple photos and added another quote. I'll see about FAC. Hmlarson (talk) 17:05, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]