Talk:MegaTraveller 1: The Zhodani Conspiracy/GA1

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

Reviewer: TheSandDoctor (talk · contribs) 23:33, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * It did have some weird double (or in some cases triple) spacing issues, but I was able to quickly remedy those myself. Due to the fact that I only removed the weird spacing issues and did some minor copy editing, I do not believe it to constitute being too involved with the article nor to have contributed significantly to it to the extent where it would be inappropriate for me to review it.
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those 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&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * The article has been mainly dormant for an extended period of time and, even when looking back at its history from 2012 and earlier, it does not appear to have ever had an edit war. Definitely stable.
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Well done to all editors who have positively contributed to the article since it was initially created by on 29 August 2009 at 19:12 (UTC)!
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * The article has been mainly dormant for an extended period of time and, even when looking back at its history from 2012 and earlier, it does not appear to have ever had an edit war. Definitely stable.
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Well done to all editors who have positively contributed to the article since it was initially created by on 29 August 2009 at 19:12 (UTC)!
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Well done to all editors who have positively contributed to the article since it was initially created by on 29 August 2009 at 19:12 (UTC)!