Talk:Zoom! (poetry book)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Boca Jóvenes (talk · contribs) 14:06, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this. Hope to have something for you soon. BoJó | talk UTC 14:06, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, I'll aim to get to any comments promptly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:05, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA criteria

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

I do apologise, Chiswick Chap. I read the article two weekends ago and intended to pass it but I was called away for something urgent and I completely forgot to complete this page. The article is very interesting and well written, completely within scope, good referencing and with no problems I can see. It is an immediate GA pass (that is, it should have been immediate!). Very well done. All the best. BcJvs | talk UTC 06:26, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I should have included the criteria template earlier so more apologies. The article easily meets all the criteria in my opinion. As I said above, it is well written, it fully complies with the MOS and it presents a good breadth of coverage within scope. Verification is satisfactory and I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the content. Well done. BcJvs | talk UTC 13:11, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]