Talk:Beleriand/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Reviewer: MyCatIsAChonk (talk · contribs) 21:43, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi again! I'll take this one. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 21:43, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Super, will get to this shortly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 03:57, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	The description column in the table "Places in Beleriand" should be capitalized. Done. No typos, prose is all good.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	In my opinion, "destroyed at end of First Age" is not needed in the short description. Removed. Lead is good, "fictional history" is nicely summarized and cited to Tolkien books, tables are appropriate.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Can refs 2, 3, and 4 be linked to the reviews? This is beyond the GA criteria, but I've linked them for you. Thank you; refs are properly presented in a references section divided into primary and secondary sources.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	All citations are to books, book reviews, or journal articles, all reliable.
	2c. it contains no original research.	All claims are properly cited, no OR.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Earwig shows no copyvios/plagiarism; the phrases Earwig caught in the highest result are mostly names, so it's all good.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Addresses all the things there is to address in an article about a fictional place; I appreciate the inclusion of the "lost poetry" section! Many thanks.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Nicely summarized, especially "Fictional history"; summarizing Tolkien stories can be daunting but this is done well. Very nice! That's very kind of you.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	No bias visible.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No edit wars in the past six months.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	File:Idylls of the King 18.jpg needs a fixed PD tag. Added. All media are correctly tagged with PD/CC tags. No non-free use media present.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Media are all fitting and properly captioned. The most notable image is a large map, but it makes sense for this to be so big.
	7. Overall assessment.	This article is good to go. Nicely done!

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.