Talk:Postal (comics)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Etzedek24 (talk · contribs) 21:31, 11 August 2018 (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, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Comments: It's very well done. A good synthesis of primary and secondary work. I removed a redlink and a citation about inserting black characters because the source didn't seem to have much to do with the article. It would benefit, I think, from maybe one or two more images, but the infobox is good enough for GAN. Props to you,. Cheers, Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 22:11, 11 August 2018 (UTC)