Talk:Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps/GA1

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

Reviewer: Darkwarriorblake (talk · contribs) 20:12, 5 October 2011 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Only small issues to deal with.
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Accolades section could use some minor prose to accompany the table.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * What is the ref titled "Hebzucht is legaal geworden"? It's published by someone I can't find on here, assumedly it is a foreign language piece?  It has no real detail that I imagine someone could look up to verify the claim it makes, not that it is particularly controversial.
 * 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, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Awaiting clarification or improvement of highlighted ref.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Awaiting clarification or improvement of highlighted ref.
 * Awaiting clarification or improvement of highlighted ref.

Fixed the ref, added a little text to Accolades... and what image are you talking about? igordebraga ≠ 17:18, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I passed the images, the comment is from the template, I didn't notice it. Reading article... Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:55, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * OK I'm fine with the changes made, congrats for your contribution. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:58, 12 October 2011 (UTC)