Talk:Bowsette/GA2

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

Reviewer: Abryn (talk · contribs) 19:49, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

I mean, I love Bowsette, so how can I not review this? - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 19:49, 5 May 2019 (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, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * At one point it notes that Luigi and Peach are visibly shocked, but the sources attached don't seem to state as such. Is there a reliable source that can be used to describe the contents of the image?
 * Removed 'visibly shocked', should be alright without that bit of text.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:56, 5 May 2019 (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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Seems pretty rad. Good job with it. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 20:57, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Seems pretty rad. Good job with it. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 20:57, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Seems pretty rad. Good job with it. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 20:57, 5 May 2019 (UTC)