Talk:Emma Stone/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 12:44, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

I'll be happy to take this JAG  UAR   12:44, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Initial comments

 * "such as creating awareness on breast cancer" - might be worth linking breast cancer
 * The lead summarises the article well, so no issues here
 * The Awards and nominations section has no citations
 * No dead links. Impressive!
 * No dab links

I can hardly believe this myself but the article is flawless. It is well written, fully comprehensive and all the references check out. I would have passed this outright if it wasn't for the unsourced Awards section, in which the GA criteria states that every section or paragraph must contain at least one citation. Once that is addressed, this can pass. Well done on all the work! I literally couldn't have brought up any other issues in this review. JAG UAR   13:21, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * ! Well, one can refer to the sources in the career section. I did not cite sources in the awards section as I did not want to repeat a bunch of sources which look weird. ツ FrB.TG (talk) 13:28, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * That's understandable. Passing  JAG  UAR   13:30, 10 April 2016 (UTC)