Login
Login

Talk:Hedonism/GA1

GA review

{{Good article tools}}

{{al|{{#titleparts:Hedonism/GA1|-1}}|noname=yes}}
:This review is transcluded from Talk:Hedonism/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: {{User|Phlsph7}} 10:15, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Brent Silby (talk · contribs) 09:24, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

class="wikitable" style="width: 100%; width:50em"
height=50 | GA review
{{small|(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)}}
#It is reasonably well written.

  1. :a (prose, spelling, and grammar): {{GAList/check|pass}}
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): {{GAList/check|pass}}
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
  3. :a (references): {{GAList/check|pass}}
    b (citations to reliable sources): {{GAList/check|pass}}
    c (OR): {{GAList/check|pass}}
    d (copyvio and plagiarism): {{GAList/check|pass}}
  4. It is broad in its coverage.
  5. :a (major aspects): {{GAList/check|pass}}
    b (focused): {{GAList/check|pass}}
  6. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
  7. :Fair representation without bias: {{GAList/check|pass}}
  8. It is stable.
  9. :No edit wars, etc.: {{GAList/check|pass}}
  10. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
  11. :a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): {{GAList/check|pass}}
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions): {{GAList/check|pass}}
style="text-align:center;" |

Overall:

Pass/Fail: {{GAList/check|pass}}

height=30|15px · 15px · 15px · 15px

Spot-checked the sources and they all are reliable and comprehensive. The prose is very clear and meets the GA standards. The article meets all other GA criteria as well. I am going to pass it. Congratulations!