Talk:TM and Cult Mania/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:34, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

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

Disambiguations: No dabs found

Linkrot: No dead links found. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:38, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   A few minor points:

   He focused his studies child psychiatry with research at Dalhousie University Should there be an into or similar here?Y

   Suess performed research with Persinger in researching affects of geological phenomena on unidentified flying object sightings in Washington;[6] the two conducted similar research in Toronto and Ottawa Can we find another word than research in at least one instance to improve the flow?Y

   Utilizing scientific techniques, TM and Cult Mania analyzes the efficacy or lack thereof of the TM meditation process, concluding, "no more effective than many other meditation techniques". Perhaps concluding that it is "no more...? Y

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   I assume good faith for all offline sources.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Concise and sufficiently explanaotory.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

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):

   Appropriate FUR

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Just a few minor prose issues to be addressed. On hold. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:50, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

   All done, thanks for the quick response. An interesting artcile, happy to pass as GA status. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 23:39, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the GA Review! I believe I have addressed all points holding it up. ;) Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 23:23, 30 June 2010 (UTC)