Talk:Land of Black Gold/GA1

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

Reviewer: Ssven2 (talk · contribs) 05:59, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

I will review this article. Thank you. — Ssven2  Speak 2 me '' 05:59, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments

 * "It then began serialisation in France in the magazine Coeurs Vaillants-Ames Vaillants from 4 August 1940, but after an interruption continued in Message Aux Couers Caillants in June 1945." — Doesn't make sense.
 * I've changed this to the following: "After being published in Belgium, the story began serialisation in neighbouring France; initially appearing in the magazine Coeurs Vaillants-Âmes Vaillants from 4 August 1940, the story was ultimately interrupted, and would only recommence in June 1945, this time in the magazine Message Aux Couers Caillants." Midnightblueowl (talk) 16:43, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * wikilink "eczema".
 * Done! Midnightblueowl (talk) 16:35, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * "worklaod" — typo.
 * That's weird; I thought that I'd already corrected that one. No matter - I've corrected it now! Midnightblueowl (talk) 16:35, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Assouline's review can be added in the "Critical Analysis" section as well.
 * Looking through Assouline's biography, he really offers very little in the way of critical commentary on Land of Black Gold but I have included what I can; a brief comment on the inclusion of Haddock into the adventure. Midnightblueowl (talk) 16:53, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

That's all from me. Another great read, Midnightblueowl. Address the comments whilst providing explanations and the article is passed. — Ssven2  Speak 2 me '' 08:58, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
 * 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:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * 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 if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall: Passed, my queries were met and solved by the nominator.
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 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 if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall: Passed, my queries were met and solved by the nominator.
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall: Passed, my queries were met and solved by the nominator.
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Congratulations! The article is passed. — Ssven2  Speak 2 me '' 17:29, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you Ssven2 ! Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:37, 25 June 2015 (UTC)