Talk:LulzSec/GA2

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

Reviewer: Ciaran Sinclair (talk · contribs) 15:23, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll review this, but first there's a few problems.


 * Members and associates seems to have some false information, Sabu's name has been changed.
 * That appears to have just been vandalism; it has been changed back. かんぱい！ Scapler (talk) 20:37, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The lead claims that LulzSec is a computer hacker group, but later in the article it claims that they have disbanded. Ciaran Sinclair (talk) 15:23, 28 April 2012 (UTC)


 * 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:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 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:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Great article. Ciaran Sinclair (talk) 22:47, 6 May 2012 (UTC)