Talk:Ford Nation
Ford Nation has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: February 27, 2014. (Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Ford Nation/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 00:03, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Nominator: Zanimum (talk)
Hi! My review for this article will be here shortly. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 00:03, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks! -- Zanimum (talk) 00:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
1: Well-written
- a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
- b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Check for WP:LEAD:
|
Done
Check for WP:LAYOUT: Done
|
Done
Check for WP:WTW: Done
Check for WP:MOSFICT: Done
|
Done
|
2: Verifiable with no original research
- a. Has an appropriate reference section: Yes
- b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: excellent (Thorough check on Google.)
Done
Check for WP:RS: Done
|
Done
Check for inline citations WP:MINREF: Done
|
- c. No original research: Done
Done
|
3: Broad in its coverage
a. Major aspects:
|
---|
Done
|
b. Focused:
|
---|
Done
|
4: Neutral
Done
4. Fair representation without bias: Done
|
5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes
6: Images Done (None)
Images:
|
---|
Done
6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: Done
6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: Done
|
As per the above checklist, there are no issues with the article and it’s a GA. Thanks, Nicholas, very much for your diligence in writing such great articles.
Promoting the article to GA status. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 22:47, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Editorializing
[edit]I disagree with the editorializing in the second paragraph of the "Background" section. It's not in keeping with neutrality, as it seeks to equate right-wing politics with the behavior of the Ford brothers.Landroo (talk) 09:45, 18 March 2014 (UTC)