Talk:Agnes Grey/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: -- Cirt (talk) 06:51, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I will review this article. -- Cirt (talk) 06:51, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Failed "good article" nomination
This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of November 5, 2010, compares against the six good article criteria:


 * 1. Well written?: Needs significant copyediting. Overusage of commas makes for long sentences, which seem to be awkward in nature, and could use copyediting for succinctness.
 * 2. Factually accurate?: Concerns about amount of sources utilized in proportion to amount of scholarship available on the topic.
 * 3. Broad in coverage?: Not thorough. Very short article, could be expanded quite significantly. Literally every single subsection on this article's page could and should be greatly expanded with additional WP:RS sources and reflective of scholarly research and literary criticism on the subject matter.
 * 4. Neutral point of view?: Without representation of a serious amount of additional sources, not sure this is fully reflective of the sum total of perspectives present in secondary sources on this topic.
 * 5. Article stability? No significant concerns regarding stability.
 * 6. Images?: No significant concerns with images.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.— -- Cirt (talk) 18:56, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * More references? Have you taken a look through what is available, I was actually rather surprised how little scholarship is available. Could you please specify which sources you would like to have seen? Sadads (talk) 23:47, 8 November 2010 (UTC)