Jump to content

Talk:Fran (Final Fantasy)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleFran (Final Fantasy) has been listed as one of the Video games 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.
Good topic starFran (Final Fantasy) is part of the Final Fantasy XII series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 29, 2019Good article nomineeListed
November 25, 2019Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review

[edit]

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.



GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Fran (Final Fantasy)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 08:20, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

[edit]
[edit]

Prose

[edit]

Lede

[edit]

Concept and creation

[edit]

Appearances

[edit]

Reception

[edit]

Notes & References

[edit]

GA Review

[edit]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Comments

[edit]

WIll finish up on this tomorrow. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 03:18, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the wait, @Lee Vilenski:. I think it is ready for a re-review. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 18:17, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about the misspelling - Vilenski is a completely made up name. I'll try and get to this in the next couple days.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 19:31, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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.