Talk:Victory Road (2004)/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Hi, I am reviewing your article for GA. I went through it, copyediting it some. The article seems very good. There was one sentence I did not understand:
- "Afterward, Jarrett retrieved the championship..."
—Mattisse (Talk) 16:43, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
- I believe I fixed it.--WillC 20:48, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
- Looks good! —Mattisse (Talk) 01:51, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Final GA review (see here for criteria)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): Well written b (MoS): Follows MoS
- a (prose): Well written b (MoS): Follows MoS
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable c (OR): No OR
- a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable c (OR): No OR
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): Sets the context b (focused): Remains focused on subject
- a (major aspects): Sets the context b (focused): Remains focused on subject
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias: NPOV
- Fair representation without bias: NPOV
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
A good, clear article! Passes GA. Congratulations! —Mattisse (Talk) 01:51, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks, it is good to have TNA's first PPV under GA status.--WillC 09:00, 24 January 2009 (UTC)