Talk:We Ride/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Toa Nidhiki05 (talk · contribs) 00:47, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this article. Toa Nidhiki05 00:47, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks. Aaron • ^{You Da One} 00:52, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

• 1a) Absolutely no grammar errors that need correction - excellent job. It is likely not FA-quality, but is more than adequate for a GA.
• 1b) Meets all criteria as well.

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

• Per WP:GACN, all of the above are passed.

1. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

• All two of these are clear.

1. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

• I believe this is rather fair.

1. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

• Not an issue.

1. 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):

• I don't see a problem with either of theese.

1. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

• Overall, a nice article with no real problems with GA-criteria. Good job!

• Thanks :) Aaron • ^{You Da One} 11:56, 4 February 2012 (UTC)