Talk:Wind phone/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wasted Time R (talk · contribs) 00:19, 17 April 2021 (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, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   I've made a few copyedits for clarity and MoS points, hopefully you are okay with them.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   I looked around a bit but didn't find anything to add to what's here.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   I was tempted to say the where visitors can hold one-way conversations with deceased loved ones in the lede should be reworded for clarity, but the by "talking" to him on the phone later makes that clear and I decided it's better the way it is.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   I scaled down the Ireland image because it was too big relative to the others.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   This is a really nice article. I almost always place GA nominations on hold, but with the few changes I made, I believe this meets the requirements and I am passing it right now.

@Wasted Time R: Your edits to the article are great. Thank you so much for the review! DanCherek (talk) 01:23, 17 April 2021 (UTC)