Talk:Hollywood Undercover/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 20:41, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)

Thank you very much! Cirt (talk) 00:21, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * WEll written and sufficiently follows the MoS
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * All online references are live, assume good faith for off-line sources, all sources sufficiently reliable, the artcile is well referenced.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Sufficiently broad and focussed
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Neutral
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * A non free use rationale has been supplied. There was no caption for the book cover, so I added one
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * WEll, I just read it through another time and I really can't fault it apart from the lack of caption, which I decided to address directly. Congratulations on another good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * WEll, I just read it through another time and I really can't fault it apart from the lack of caption, which I decided to address directly. Congratulations on another good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)