Talk:LulzSec/GA1

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 Review

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

Reviewer: The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 17:09, 24 June 2011 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Needs consistent Grammar

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

   Lead Fails to summarize article

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Need to fill out citation templates

   C. No original research:

   I see some mild Synth in some places

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   Surprisingly even handed

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   See final comment

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   This article has the potential for GA as its well sourced and well maintained. The article documents a Current event and is in a period of intense flux. Even if the quality was top notch today it could rapidly deteriorate over next few months. I hate to make this a speedy fail but right now it fails to meet Wikipedia:GACR nor am I convinced it could be brought up to it in a reasonable period of time.