Talk:Pre-Code Hollywood/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dincher (talk) 21:13, 16 October 2010 (UTC) I am working on this review. I am going over six points. I will use non-wiki formatting for the points I have yet to address. Wikiformatted points are addressed and are good to go or awaiting a response. Dincher (talk) 21:19, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well written?: The article is well written and follows the manual of style. Dincher (talk) 21:35, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2. Factually accurate?: Article is well referenced with sources to verify the information. most sources are offline, others check out, assuming goood faith. Dincher (talk) 21:37, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

3. Broad in coverage?: Very thorough and detailed sections about the various types of film that were "risque" at the time. Dincher (talk) 21:39, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

4. Neutral point of view?: Article is written in a neutral point of view. Dincher (talk) 21:39, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

5. Article stability? Article is very stable except for the occasional vandalism revert - the article is very stable and looks like it's been largely the work of one main editor. Dincher (talk) 21:19, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

6. Images?: Article contains sufficient images and they are all properly tagged. Dincher (talk) 21:52, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have passed this article according to the requirements of the GA criteria. Continue to improve the article, making sure that all new information is properly sourced. To anyone that is reading this review, please consider reviewing an article or two at WP:GAN to help with the large backlog. Instructions can be found here. Keep up the good work, and I hope that you continue to bring articles up to Good Article status. If you have any further questions about this review, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Dincher (talk) 21:57, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]