Talk:Davara/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: No Great Shaker (talk · contribs) 21:17, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Basic GA criteria

Well written: the prose is clear and concise.
Well written: the spelling and grammar are correct.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for lead sections.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for article structure and layout.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for words to watch.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for writing about fiction – not applicable.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for list incorporation – not applicable.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for use of quotations – not applicable.
All statements are verifiable with inline citations provided.
All inline citations are from reliable sources, etc.
Contains a list of all references in accordance with the layout style guideline.
No original research.
No copyright violations or plagiarism.
Broad in its coverage but within scope and in summary style.
Neutral.
Stable.
Illustrated, if possible.
Images are at least fair use and do not breach copyright.

For reviews, I use the above list of criteria as a benchmark and complete the variables as I go along. Hope to provide some feedback soon. No Great Shaker (talk) 21:17, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

A lot of amendments were necessary and most were corrections of one kind or another. You need to be more thorough in proofreading and copyediting before nominating an article and also check facts: for example, Selby is not a city, only a town. Even so, and despite being short in length, the article provides a full coverage of the Davara's career and is an interesting read. Having done the necessary corrections, it now ticks all of the applicable boxes above and I'm happy to promote it to GA. Well done. No Great Shaker (talk) 10:17, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments. Lettler (talk) 13:59, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]