Talk:Doge (meme)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 04:24, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

I will review later today. Freikorp (talk) 04:24, 3 April 2015 (UTC)


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * Half the references use 'publisher' and the other half use 'work'. Also why are some work/publishers wikilinked and others not? Consistency is needed at both of these points.
 * The ones which have such pages are now wikilinked &#39;&#39;&#39;tAD&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 07:03, 3 April 2015 (UTC)


 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * Keith Wagstaff reference is dead. Find a mirror or an archive.
 * Done &#39;&#39;&#39;tAD&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 07:07, 3 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Sato, Atsuko source may not back up that this is where the female Shiba Inu was first pictured, or where the images are taken from, rather it just seems to be the actual first post itself (which may not confirm that it itself is the origin), please confirm.
 * Links within reliable sources confirm this is the real "doge", but this blog itself is better as an external link


 * What makes The Bark Post a reliable source?
 * Nothing. The point it was "proving" in the lead is backed up in the body by better sources, thus I removed it


 * C. No original research:
 * Google trends data should have a non-primary source. 'The Bark Post' source backs it up, but i'm still looking into whether or not that source meets WP:RS.
 * Source replaced &#39;&#39;&#39;tAD&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 07:38, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Placing on hold until issues are addressed. I made several minor fixes; feel free to revert and instead discuss the changes with me. Freikorp (talk) 06:21, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 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 tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Well done. I'm passing this now. Freikorp (talk) 07:49, 3 April 2015 (UTC)