Talk:Serbia Against Violence (coalition)/GA1

{{atopg

| status =

| result = Passed. History6042 (talk) 21:20, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

{{Good article tools}}

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

Nominator: {{User|Vacant0}} 18:48, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: History6042 (talk · contribs) 01:24, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I will be reviewing this article.

class="wikitable" style="text-align:left"

style="vertical-align:top;" ! width="30" | Rate ! width="300"| Attribute ! | Review Comment

style="vertical-align:top;" | colspan="3" | 1. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|1}}: {{GATable/item|1a|y|I could read this no promblem. }} {{GATable/item|1b|y|Lead seems fine, layout is good, words to watch aren't in there, it's not fiction, and the only list is in the members. It complies. }}

style="vertical-align:top;" | colspan="3" | 2. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|2}}, as shown by a source spot-check: {{GATable/item|2a|y|There isn't any uncited info. There is also a references section.}} {{GATable/item|2b|y| }} {{GATable/item|2c|y|There isn't any uncited info. }} {{GATable/item|2d|y| }}

style="vertical-align:top;" | colspan="3" | 3. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|3}}: {{GATable/item|3a|y|It addresses the coalition's members, ideology, history, and performence. }} {{GATable/item|3b|y|I think this is fine, there isn't too much detail. }} {{GATable/item|4|y|I see no biased content. }} {{GATable/item|5|y|There is no edit warring. }}

style="vertical-align:top;" | colspan="3" | 6. {{Wikipedia:Good article criteria/GAC|6}}: {{GATable/item|6a|y|Yes, the image has a good copyright tag. }} {{GATable/item|6b|y|Yes, the image is relevant because it shows the party's representatives. }} {{GATable/item|7|y| }}

I will now check sources. History6042 (talk) 11:54, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

:Inline citations; 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 have no copyright issues and support the text. History6042 (talk) 12:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

::8, 9, 10, and 11 are fine. History6042 (talk) 12:05, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

:::I see that you are a newer reviewer, so FYI, you do not have to spotcheck all references in the article. You are only required to spotcheck a certain amount of them to confirm whether there is no original research. However, you are required to check the reliability of all references. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 12:37, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

::::Okay, thank you. History6042 (talk) 12:39, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

:::12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 are all good. History6042 (talk) 12:39, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

::::Now, I will check reliability. History6042 (talk) 12:40, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

:::::Everything seems good.History6042 (talk) 21:18, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

::::::I think this passes. History6042 (talk) 21:20, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}