Talk:Floorless Coaster/GA1

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

Reviewer: John F. Lewis (talk · contribs) 20:41, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * The Lead section should summarize the article and not introduce new topics and be weighty. Also move the Quote in 'Design' to the bottom and expand on the quote. In addition could anything regarding Safety and Mechanics be moved into their own independent section?
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * Seems mostly reliable, Could there be any alternatives to YouTube videos? They are not a major concern, but one thing I would like to raise in this case.
 * 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 tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * Captions to the images are not that good, Please expand them according to WP:CAPTION. Also if possible, Add WP:ALT to images.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Solve the issues above and the article should then be a good fit for GA.
 * 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 where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * Captions to the images are not that good, Please expand them according to WP:CAPTION. Also if possible, Add WP:ALT to images.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Solve the issues above and the article should then be a good fit for GA.
 * Solve the issues above and the article should then be a good fit for GA.

All issues addressed. Passed.