Talk:Oxford Circus/GA1

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

Reviewer: Pkbwcgs (talk · contribs) 16:04, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

I am going to pick up the review of Oxford Circus. My first impressions is that it is a well-written article and the majority of paragraphs are properly sourced. One thing I have picked up on is that the article's lead does not have any sources. One thing I have picked up on in a recent review I did to a different article is overlinking. However, this article is not overlinked which is good. I will do a more detailed review in the next seven days. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:04, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

The lead doesn't need sources explicitly (per WP:LEADCITE), though all the information in the lead must be present in the body, and cited to reliable sources there. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  10:41, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clarifying. I agree with you that the information mentions in the lead is cited in the body so that is all good. Pkbwcgs (talk) 11:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I have to do the copyvio check before passing this article as a good article. Pkbwcgs (talk) 11:46, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh dear, Earwig's copyright violation detector is broken so I am unable to check for copyright violations. Pkbwcgs (talk) 11:58, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * This article has now passed WP:GA. Thanks for all your help Ritchie333. The article was very well written and is at a good quality so this was a nice and straightforward assessment. Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:29, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  17:31, 17 February 2020 (UTC)