Talk:Carole Lombard/GA1

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

Reviewer: Tim riley (talk · contribs) 15:16, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Will review. Starting first read-through. Tim riley (talk) 15:16, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

This is plainly of GA quality (and more). There are a few phrases I'll be quibbling at when the article comes to FAC, but there's nothing that doesn't meet the GA requirements. (As a purely personal comment, and it's absolutely none of my business as GA reviewer, but as the article is so lavishly illustrated I could do without the picture of Lombard in "Style and legacy", which I find positively scary.) Just one substantive comment: do we really believe that story about flipping a coin before the fatal airline flight? Who was there to see it and tell the tale? Is Classic Hollywood Bios a reliable source? Is the story corroborated in any other source? I'd like to be reassured on this point before I do the honours. Tim riley (talk) 15:59, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, there's tons of books which say about flipping coins. Will remove photo, agree it doesn't really look like her and is rather scary!♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:38, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Hmm. As there are good sources, then OK. No other queries.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 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: