Talk:I Don't Like the Drugs (But the Drugs Like Me)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Homeostasis07 (talk · contribs) 22:03, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing this over the next few hours. Homeostasis07 (talk) 22:03, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

You may have seen me editing over the past few hours. There were a couple of typos, a couple of things that I've rephrased, and I've re-titled a sub-section. Also, the personnel section needed some alphabetizing, and there were a few international charts missing from the charts sub-section. I find it quicker to be bold and do these things myself, rather than post a big list here of tiny little things that need doing. This is clearly a well-written article, with verifiable statements sourced to reliable sources. Happy to promote it.


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * 1) Overall:

Congratulations, once again, Magic. Homeostasis07 (talk) 01:39, 22 December 2017 (UTC)