Talk:Love Kraft/GA1

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

I have reformatted dates to be consistent. The dates in the cited references should not be wiki-linked, see Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers), so I have removed those wiki links. There were also some format errors, which cause 2 separate Guardian article references to be both named Guardian, I separated them to Guardian1 & Guardian2. The article, in my opinion meets the criteria for good article status. I checked against all 6 GA criteria and I think the article meets tehse. I checked all the refrences and they support the ciatations. I have commented at the review page and await a second opinion. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:12, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks Jezhotwells - this article is in British English though so I've changed the date format back to day-month-year. Cavie78 (talk) 18:33, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, but originally there were one or two dates in month day year format. At least it is now consistent. Jezhotwells (talk) 03:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

GAN notes
Well-written: (a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct (b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.
 * The article meets these criteria

Factually accurate and verifiable: (a) it provides references to all sources of information, and at minimum contains a section dedicated to the attribution of those sources in accordance with the guide to layout; (b) at minimum, it provides in-line citations from reliable sources 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; and (c) it contains no original research. Broad in its coverage: (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Illustrated, if possible, by images: (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. llustrated, if possible, by images: (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
 * The article meets these criteria
 * The article meets these criteria in my opinion
 * The article meets these criteria - broad coverage with sufficient detail to explain the subject.
 * The article meets these criteria
 * The article meets these criteria, it is stable, no edit wars, etc.
 * all criteria met. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:46, 13 March 2009 (UTC)