Talk:Wordless novel/GA1

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

Reviewer: Cirt (talk · contribs) 19:18, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I will review this article. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:18, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Successful good article nomination
I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of June 15, 2013, compares against the six good article criteria:


 * 1. Well written?: Writing quality is good enough for GA. I'd watch for run-on-sentences, overusage of commas and semicolons, and stuff like that for future copyediting. Consider a peer review where you solicit input from previously uninvolved editors, and/or WP:GOCE.
 * 2. Factually accurate?: Duly cited throughout. I very much like the citation style and formatting used.
 * 3. Broad in coverage?: Covers all major aspects in detail and yet at the same time not overly-detailed. Quite accessible for the reader, I like this style.
 * 4. Neutral point of view?: Neutrally worded tone, no issues here.
 * 5. Article stability? No stability issues after inspection of article edit history and talk page history going back over one month.
 * 6. Images?: Image check okay. I'd recommend replacing or removing File:CABINET DES DR CALIGARI 01.jpg.

Fine job overall. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations. — &mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:42, 15 June 2013 (UTC)