Talk:John Maus/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Zawl (talk · contribs) 12:22, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

I'm reviewing this. — Zawl 12:22, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	I failed to locate any issues with the grammar and spelling.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	The article complies with the manual of style guidelines. I couldn't find any issues.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	The article is sufficiently sourced with reliable references.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	The reliability of Weirdo Music Forever is questionable but it can be discussed elsewhere (e.g. talk page).
	2c. it contains no original research.	The discography section contains no sources but a WP:BEFORE check shows the information to be valid.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Two paragraphs of text are copied directly from the source and are used as quotes but it is acceptable per fair use as the usage is minimal, have contextual significance and is not replaceable with free text.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	It addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	It stays focused on the topic.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	The article is written neutrally without editorial bias.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No edit warring since the beginning of the year.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Images are tagged with their copyright status.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Suitable captions exist.
	7. Overall assessment.	The article is written properly and passes the Good Article criteria.