Talk:On the Pulse of Morning/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 23:54, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well-written:

I condensed the double-spacing between many of the sentences, and made a few rare grammatical corrections/adjustments. After that, the prose, grammar, and general layout of the article appears to be in good form and format. Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 00:59, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation

Verifiable with no original research:

The article refers to many reliable, third-party sources, and the text frequently cites them. Nothing appears to be original research. Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 01:01, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose)

(c) it contains no original research

Broad in its coverage:

The article covers all main aspects you would expect in an article on a work of litertature -specifically a poem. None of the information seems to be trivial or weighing the article down. Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 01:04, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

The article does not appear biased towards or against the poem, and does well in balancing its coverage of the critics reviews in the "Critical response and impact" section. Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 01:04, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

According to the present revision history, the article has never gone under an edit war, from the time of its creation to now. Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 05:51, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

The two images in the article are public domain, so no fair-use policies are violated. Both images have valid licenses and serve a relevant purpose to the article. The captions included beneath both images are proper and appropriate. Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 05:51, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

Having read carefully through this article, with minor modifications made, I feel it is now ready to be included with the Language and literature good articles. Congratulations! Like my singing? Ha-la-la-la-la-la-LA-LAAA!!! (talk) 01:06, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]