User:Bollyjeff/MySandbox2

no crore - MOS:COMMONALITY

Template


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

This article has shortcomings with respect to the good article criteria, and is not up to par with other film GAs that I have seen.
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Missing sections normally found in film articles, and lead has issues. See WP:MOSFILM.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * More sources are needed. Some failed verification. Very little of the info is backed up by reliable third party sources.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Not broad at all.
 * 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):
 * I am unsure if you can use images from IMDB. If you are aware that this has been discussed and approved, please provide a link for me.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * On hold, giving one week to improve the article.
 * Pass/Fail:
 * On hold, giving one week to improve the article.

---


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




 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * This article is a bit lacking in the grammar department. It could use a going over by the WP:GOCE, but it may be just good enough for GA. Try to get another editor to scan it.  Lead needs filling out.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 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:
 * The Legacy section seems a bit much for a film of this stature.
 * 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):
 * Can we get another image in here somehow? Not necessary, but would be appreciated.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * On hold, giving one week to improve the article.
 * On hold, giving one week to improve the article.