Talk:Berge Meere und Giganten/GA1

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

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 11:21, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * I have never read any books by Döblin, but would like some day :)
 * He's great, and there's always something new to find. Sindinero (talk) 08:06, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Lead should be larger. For example, the section "Genesis and publication" is not summarized in the lead-- ♫GoP♫ T C N 19:43, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ Sindinero (talk) 08:06, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Will continue later
 * I pretty much enjoyed the prose. Imagine one will read from top to bottom, and then discovers that there is no English translation available to date :P.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Use a consistent style, eg " 790-792" and then "155-7" (you should use the first version, as the latter is misleading)
 * ✅ Sindinero (talk) 08:11, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall: Great article!
 * Pass/Fail:
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall: Great article!
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail: