Talk:Mockingjay/GA1

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

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 21:22, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

: The article's content, prose, and layout all comply with MOS policies. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 23:32, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * (a)
 * (b)

: The article uses plenty of reliable third-party sources, and does not contain any original research. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 23:32, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * (a)
 * (b)
 * (c)

: The article is very thorough in its coverage of all expected aspects of the topic, but does not contain any trivia. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 23:32, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * (a)
 * (b)

. The article holds no bias towards or against its subject. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 23:32, 1 March 2013 (UTC) . While vandals appear to flock to these Hunger Games pages, none of the edits going back to early January appear to constitute an edit war. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 22:37, 26 February 2013 (UTC) : The single image used in the article is vital because it illustrates the main cover of the book which is covered. A free version does not exist, and the image has a valid license and rationale provided, so it qualifies for usage in the article under fair use laws. Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 22:37, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
 * (a)
 * (b)

After reading through this article, I feel it satisfies the GA criteria for Literature articles. Congratulations! Oh, is this the Top Secret room? I had no idea... (talk) 23:33, 1 March 2013 (UTC)