Talk:Community Trolls/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk · contribs) 04:21, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 04:23, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * 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):
 * Prose is fine, complies sufficiently with MoS
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * References appear OK, I could only check the three on-line sources but all support the cited statements. Assume good faith for the rest. No evidence of OR.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Sufficient coverage.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * NPOV
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * stable
 * 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):
 * Two images used with suitable captions and licenses. The music sample is less than 10% and thus meets the criteria for media files.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * All good to go, happy to list. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 04:42, 4 December 2011 (UTC)