Talk:Junko Sakurada/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 17:48, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: Three found and fixed.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 17:50, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:51, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Reasonably well written, complies with key elements of MoS

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Well referenced, sources appear to be RS, assume good faith for off-line sources.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   I believe that this is sufficiently detailed and focussed, especially in the light of here withdrawal from public view.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   NPOV

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Stable

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   No images used.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I believe that the article meets the GA criteria, so I am happy to list it. Congratulations! Jezhotwells (talk) 18:01, 4 March 2011 (UTC)