Talk:Appian Way Productions/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 14:46, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I'll take a look at this soon! JAG UAR   14:46, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list corporation:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Initial comments

 * "the psychological thriller Shutter Island" - no year given for Shutter Island? (2010)
 * Does the company have a logo?
 * "Appian Way's following film was released three years later" - what year is this? The prose makes it hard to keep track of the years
 * Although considering that the article is short, I would recommend expanding the second paragraph of the lead per WP:LEADLENGTH

Just going to promote this right away. I couldn't find anything that might put it on hold. This is well written, well referenced and compact, thus meeting the GA criteria. Good work with this! JAG UAR   19:04, 21 December 2015 (UTC)