User:Brachy0008/How to make an article GA status

Getting an article to GA status can be a bit of a challenge for some editors, so I (as a semi-experienced reviewer, and yes I learn from my reviews) decided to make a little guide to help a bit.

What are the criteria?
(criteria in bold denote the more problematic or challenging ones)


 * 1) Well written
 * 2) * Prose is clear and concise
 * 3) * Follows Manual of Style
 * 4) Verifiable with NO original research (probably so that hoaxes can't get into Wikipedia with the guise of original research).
 * 5) * Has a list of references. Consistent format and capitalisation for all sources, and dead links must be labeled as such.
 * 6) * Reliable sources are cited inline (see WP:RSP, WP:RSN or your respective WikiProject's reliable source list)
 * 7) * No original research
 * 8) * No copyvios or plagiarism
 * 9) Broad in its coverage
 * 10) * Addresses the main aspects of the article
 * 11) * Does not add unnecessary detail, even if it is cited by reliable sources.
 * 12) Neutral point of view (that is a challenge to some draft articles, not GA candidates)
 * 13) Stable (no edit wars, no peer reviews or featured article reviews, or any other Wikipedia-related discussion regarding article, or constant changes in content in an article).
 * 14) Contains images
 * 15) * Tagged with copyright statuses
 * 16) * Relevant to the topic, with suitable captions.

Immediate failures

 * 1) Long way from meeting one of the criteria above
 * 2) * Contains copyvios
 * 3) * Lots of edit warring
 * 4) * A lot of unreliable/virtually unknown sources (see WP:GUNREL and SELFPUB)
 * 5) Has or needs cleanup banners that have not been addressed (yet)
 * 6) Contains issues from a failed review (that have not been addressed)

Useful stuff
User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter.js can be used to denote unreliable or reliable sources.

2b. Reliable sources are cited inline
Using the Cite Highlighter script, it should denote the reliability of a source.


 * (Aquamarine) Green: Reliable
 * (Sunrise Boulevard) Yellow: Situational
 * Orange: Concerning
 * Red: Unreliable

But what if it is blank?
If all of the sources draw blanks, try restarting or troubleshooting your stuff... and it should get the colours out. But what if some are blank...? That means that it is not on the lists. So here is what to do


 * 1) Use WP:RSN (as stated earlier). You can get another Wikipedia editor to help you assess the source for you. You can also go through all of the archives of WP:RSN.
 * 2) Research on the source (very important). Try checking the about us section, or if you are lucky, the editorial policy. Try looking out for some red flags (see WP:RS).
 * 3) * Tip: You can use Wikipedia to see which publisher is that source under. See if they publish reliable (or unreliable sources), and also check the history of the source as well.
 * 4) Research on the author. They may have experience working for a reliable source, so they might be an exception to all these above (that includes unreliable sources as well). However, you might have to check for their articles on both the source in question and the reliable source.