Talk:DiDa Ritz/GA1

GA Review

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.

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

Reviewer: Thecheeseistalking98 (talk · contribs) 17:20, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Review

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
The article's grammar is serviceable but there are one-off sentences littered around it in some of the shorter paragraphs. It is laid out weirdly and the only section of the article with much information is the career section (and even then most of that is about the contestant's time and reception on Drag Race).
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
Contains unreliable sources. Plagiarism does not appear to be an issue.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Like stated before, article is mostly about the person's time on TV series with little emphasis on their career, personal life, or filmography.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Nothing to add.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
No edit wars as article is new and has low viewership.
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Images are fair use.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Overall, this article simply does not meet GA criteria.

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.