Talk:Harley & Ivy Meet Betty & Veronica/GA1

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

Reviewer: Argento Surfer (talk · contribs) 14:21, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria I'm glad to see someone else has an interest in wild Archie crossovers.
 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * Please review my copyedits for accuracy and clarity.
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * no concern
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * no concern
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * no concern
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * no concern
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * no concern
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * Who is Laura Braga, and why was she chosen for this project? Is she normally a DC artist? Did any of the reviewers comment on her style?
 * I've added a little more detail on Braga. Unfortunately, after searching through web sources and the comics issues and TPB, I cannot find any direct info about how she came to be involved in this project. I've added some reviews about her art in the "Critical response" section.
 * Each issue had at least 2 variant covers, and I don't believe any were done by Braga. I think this is worth mentioning in the publication section, if you can find sources. Here's one.
 * I've searched web sources and the comics issues and TPB, and it seems there was one variant cover for each issue besides the first. I've added a sentence in the publication section about the variants. I didn't specifically name any of the cover artists as the covers for each issue (both main and variant) were done by different artists.
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * no concern
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * no concern
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * no concern
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * no concern
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * no concern. I added an alt text description, but feel free to adjust it as you see fit.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Everything looks pretty good, but there are a few places I think the article needs to be expanded before I can promote it. Argento Surfer (talk) 15:32, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for the review. Sorry I missed it previously, hence the late response. I'm busy in real life right now, but I'll address the issues you've brought up as soon as I can. Bennv3771 (talk) 16:31, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Cool. No rush. Argento Surfer (talk) 16:39, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I've worked on the article to try and address the issues you've brought up. Do have a look and let me know your feedback. Thanks. Bennv3771 (talk) 21:06, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Everything looks great. Happy to promote this one. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:44, 24 October 2018 (UTC)