Talk:Samuel J. Briskin/GA1

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

Reviewer: Wikicology (talk · contribs) 09:37, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for this GA nomination,. I will go through the article in details later today. I might be a bit slow with this review. If you think I'm too slow and that is likely to be a problem, please let me know as soon as possible. I'm an extremely slow reviewer but my aim is always to pass rather than fail; I would rather push to improve an article rather than simply fail the review. I will normally help with minor improvement rather than listing them here. Anything more significant than minor improvements, I will raise here. I see the reviewer's role as collaborative and collegiate, so I welcome discussion regarding interpretation of the GA criteria. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 09:37, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Tick box
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is clear and concise, without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

Comments on GA criteria

 * Pass
 * Article is recently created and is stable. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 10:35, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * There is an appropriate reference section. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 10:35, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The article is focused and pertinent.Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 08:59, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Prose is clear and readable. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 21:40, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Most aspects of the relevant MoS criteria are met. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 21:40, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Prose is clear and readable. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 21:40, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Major aspects. Article appears to cover the main points - I'm not seeing anything substantial missing. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 14:01, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Images used are relevant, and appropriately captioned. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 17:15, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Images have appropriate copyright information. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 17:15, 13 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Query


 * Fail

Pass
This is an informative and helpful article on an important film producer. Passed as meeting Good Article criteria. Congratulations!