Talk:Attack on Cloudbase/GA1

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

Reviewer:  SilkTork  *YES! 11:50, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I will look at this later.  SilkTork  *YES! 11:50, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of 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 copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with 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 copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:


 * The caption on the infobox image is rather long. See CAP. The commentary is duplicated in the main text, so I question it's value as a caption.  SilkTork  *YES! 11:17, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Prose is clear and readable. Article meets relevant MoS issues, apart from WP:Lead, a common failing. Many editors view the lead as an introduction, though the guideline indicates that it should serve as a mini standalone article. The production details - such as used in the image caption - would be useful in the lead.  SilkTork  *YES! 11:22, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well researched and well presented, this is a model for how to write about tv episodes.  SilkTork  *YES! 11:33, 30 November 2010 (UTC)


 * This is a very fine article. The only main issue is the lead, which needs building up to reflect more fully the contents of the article. There is a question mark about the caption, and that could be solved by moving the second sentence to the lead. Putting on hold for seven days to allow the lead to be built up.  SilkTork  *YES! 11:33, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hold extended for seven days as nominator has not logged in.  SilkTork  *YES! 13:36, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Sincere apologies for being so absent from the site, and thank you for your prompt on my talk page. The lead section has been expanded somewhat, to three paragraphs, and the infobox image caption cut down to a one-sentence description.  Super Mario  Man  21:57, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Pass
Good work. No worries about the delay, real life happens. If you hadn't checked in by the next deadline I'd have probably done the work myself - it would have been inappropriate to fail an article so close to GA standards. This is a pass.  SilkTork  *YES! 15:46, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! All the best.  Super Mario  Man  18:01, 6 December 2010 (UTC)