Jump to content

Talk:Dédée Bazile

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Dédée Bazile/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Averageuntitleduser (talk · contribs) 21:50, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Borsoka (talk · contribs) 04:17, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Image review

Source review

Comments

I think the article needs a thorough and comprehensive copy edit. I suggest you should seek assistance at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors. I suspend the review until the copyedit is completed. Please ping me when I can continue it. Borsoka (talk) 02:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking this on! I aim to complete comments by the weekend. Averageuntitleduser (talk) 04:57, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Borsoka: Sorry for taking so long here. I should not be as busy going forward. I've replied to your comments and listed the article at GoCE. Thanks again! Averageuntitleduser (talk) 23:21, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]