Talk:Brampton Arts Walk of Fame/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: – Quadell ^(talk) 13:35, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Nominator: User:Zanimum

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.	There are many problems with grammar. The very first sentence is not a sentence, for instance. There are seeming contradictions (e.g. "The first three inductees will be unveiled" vs. a list of inductees.)
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lead section), the lead section should summarize the other sections of the article, and should not contain content not found elsewhere. This lead contains most of the article's information. Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (embedded lists), lists of content should be incorporated into prose in most cases. The information in these lists should be described in prose instead. Categories, infobox, and references are all good.
	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.	References are very good.
	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).	Citations are well done.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Not a significant problem.
	3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	This is a very short article. However, there is little that can be said definitively about an unofficial walk about which few official sources yet mention. This will probably change in the coming months.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Not a problem.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Not a problem.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	There are no edit wars. But since this walk will become official in the fall, and little official information is available, I would expect information to change rapidly in the coming 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.	The one image is fine
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	The caption does not describe the significance, and is not in the section where the subject is mentioned. There are no other pictures, though photos of the Rose Theatre, the location, and the other inductees could be acquired.
	7. Overall assessment.	It does not pass GA criteria at this time. I would recommend submitting this article to Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors or to Wikipedia:Peer review.