Talk:Chloë Sevigny/GA2

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

Reviewer: HJ Mitchell  |  April Fool!   23:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC) OK. Having had a good look at it and a skim read, the article seems like a well written and well structured biography. I have concerns over the images though. 3 of the 5 images are copyright, which probably violates Non-Free content criteria 3a and 8 (minimal use and contextual significance respectively). I don't see any real issues with the content- it's well written and the sources look good. However, you'll need to correct certain fields in the cite templates. I'll pick on #13 to illustrate:
 * It's currently:
 * The Independent is the work, it's published by Independent News and Media so your template should look like
 * The order of the parameters doesn't matter- mine was generated by a tool- it displays the same
 * The order of the parameters doesn't matter- mine was generated by a tool- it displays the same

The rest of your references are lacking in things like publishers and some are linked, others aren't. If you want to take this back to FAC, and I think you should, the references will need to be consistent. Personally, where a WP article exists, I'd link the work and publisher in every citation. Some are also lacking publication or access dates.

I'm going to pass the GA review and leave those suggestions to be fixed in preparation for FAC. I recommend you put the article up for peer review t get some more opinions and feedback before submitting to FAC. If you need me to clarify anything, I'm reachable on my talk page! HJ Mitchell |  April Fool!   23:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC)