Talk:Lilliputian Hitcher/GA1

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

Reviewer: Tintor2 (talk · contribs) 10:52, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

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

(Criteria marked are unassessed)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):
 * b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a. (reference section):
 * b. (citations to reliable sources):
 * c. (OR):
 * d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * Pass/fail:

I'll be reviewing this article.Tintor2 (talk) 10:52, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Everything looking good.
 * Only few isses I see are addressing what Production I.G and Gainax are when first mentioned Got a similar response when dealing with that Jujutsu Kaisen 0 movie.
 * Is it possible to balance the lead a bit? The first paragraph is kinda big in comparison to the following ones.
 * "of ozone in the area" might explain a bit this in case somebody is confused.
 * "Evangelion Chronicle magazine, on the other hand, noted how Okamura, in charge of producing the storyboards, blends science fiction and human drama into his works.[21]" seems fitting for the reception
 * There is something important that might be missing in Plot. What's Ritsuko's focus that's mentioned in reception?

That's all.Tintor2 (talk) 22:48, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I should have everything sorted out. The only point is the one about Evangelion Chronicle: since it is an official encyclopaedia licensed by Gainax - which I believe also gave the first-hand canon materials to write it - I don't find it pertinent to move the info to Repection.--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 16:55, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Passing the review. Good work.Tintor2 (talk) 17:45, 8 April 2023 (UTC)