Talk:Matt Smith/GA2

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I am beginning a GA review of this article. Please feel free to leave any questions, comments and other reviews below. Thanks! Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 20:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Pre-GA Questions, Comments and Other Reviews

None before review. Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 19:26, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

GA REVIEW (SECOND REVIEW) - Pass

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

Excellent article, one of the finest. Featured status around the corner?

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Well-written in an elegant, but neutral encyclopedic tone.

   B. MoS compliance:

   MoS compliant.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   A wide variety of reliable, third-party sources. BBC. The Guardian. The Independent. The Daily Mail. The London Evening Standard. IMDB.

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Well-cited throughout.

   C. No original research:

   None that I see. Article carefully patrolled by those looking for WP:OR and other uncited material.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   Broad without being overly detailed. Covers Smith's early life, early career with concise depth, excellent use of quotes from earlier career as illustration. Focused, non-speculatory coverage of his recent Time Lord-related fame.

   B. Focused:

   Narrowly focused on Smith, extraneous material is not apparent, and addition of any promptly removed.

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   Neutral tone at all times.

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   Stable. Incremental improvements always welcome. Will, I hope, be continually updated as more information about his career comes out. Some irrelevant and unsourced material reverted, minor vandalism; nothing to cause a failure.

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

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

   Nice picture of Smith. It's a LITTLE large. License is in order.

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

   Infobox pic, again, a bit big. :)

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   As stated above, excellent article. It seems the concerns of the first GA reviewer have been well-addressed. A lot of hard work has gone into making this article shine above the rest, and it really does show. I might suggest reaching for featured status soon.