Talk:Eugene O'Neill Theatre/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 11:09, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
This looks like another well-researched theatre article from Epicgenius. My experience tells me it is likely to be close to Good Article status so I will start a review shortly. simongraham (talk) 11:09, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]This is a stable and well-written article. 98.0% of authorship is by Epicgenius. It is currently ranked B class and appeared as in the Did You Know column on 11 January 2022.
- The article is of appropriate length, 4,058 words of readable prose, plus a referenced list of notable productions and an infobox.
- It is written in a summary style, consistent with relevant Manuals of Style.
- Citations seem to be thorough.
- References appear to be from reputable sources.
- Images have appropriate licensing and public domain or CC tags. Thank you, Epicgenius, for adding your two contributions to the selection.
- Earwig's Copyvio Detector identifies a 28.1% chance of copyright violation, confirming that there is a low likelihood. The highest correlation is with IBDB, which is likely due to both containing lists of productions.
- There are no obvious grammar or spelling errors.
This article is ready for assessment. simongraham (talk) 11:12, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Assessment
[edit]The six good article criteria:
- It is reasonable well written.
- the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct;
- it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead, layout and word choice.
- the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct;
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- it contains a reference section, presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
- all inline citations are from reliable sources;
- it contains no original research;
- it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism;
- it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail.
- it contains a reference section, presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
- It is broad in its coverage
- it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
- it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
- it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
- It has a neutral point of view.
- it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to different points of view.
- it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to different points of view.
- It is stable.
- it does not change significantly from day to day because of any ongoing edit war or content dispute.
- it does not change significantly from day to day because of any ongoing edit war or content dispute.
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- images are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;
- images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
- images are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;
@Epicgenius: Congratulations. You have another article that meets the Good Article criteria.