Talk:HTC Dream/GA1

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

Reviewer: Zach Vega (talk · contribs) 00:15, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria My initial impression with this article is that it's very strong, but my opinion often changes as I get further into the review.
 * 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:
 * The lead section needs to talk about the hardware and go into the software a little bit more.
 * ...And it now does.
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * The refs are a mess. The dates are inconsistent in format, there's dead links, and work and publisher are mixed up all the time.
 * Some problems remain, but much better.
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * Yes, it's good with scope.
 * B. Focused:
 * Pretty good job on this.
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * No edit wars or vandalism. Good.
 * 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:
 * All images are from Wikimedia Commons.
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * You have a photo of the phone running Android 1.6, and a photo of Android 1.6. Redundant much? Also, try to find one or two more photos. This isn't required to pass GAN, just a nice addition.
 * This can be dealt with outside of the GAN.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * The article is going pretty well, it's just that we have a few more issues to take care of. Zach Vega  ( talk to me ) 00:15, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Fixed. ViperSnake151   Talk  00:30, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Good job on improving the article! Zach Vega  ( talk to me ) 19:00, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Pass or Fail:
 * The article is going pretty well, it's just that we have a few more issues to take care of. Zach Vega  ( talk to me ) 00:15, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Fixed. ViperSnake151   Talk  00:30, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Good job on improving the article! Zach Vega  ( talk to me ) 19:00, 19 October 2013 (UTC)