Talk:Kaga Rebellion

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

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kaga Rebellion/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 10:09, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA criteria[edit]

  • Well-written:
  • With a few minor tweaks here and there, the article now fully complies with MOS policies on grammar, as well as general layout. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 10:49, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; 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
  • Verifiable with no original research:
  • The article uses many reputable publications, and makes frequent citation to them. There are no signs of original research. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 10:48, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    (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
  • Broad in its coverage:
  • The article seems to appropriately cover all aspects of its topic for which encyclopedic information was available. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 10:47, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)
  • Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  • The article maintains a neutral tone throughout. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 10:46, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  • Since the article's creation last September, it has not been subjected to edit warring or any similarly disruptive behaviour. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 09:21, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  • The article's sole image is licensed in a manner permitted by the Wikimedia Commons, so there is no risk of fair use violation. It serves a relevant conceptual-illustrative purpose for the topic of the article. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 09:21, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

    Although it may have taken me the better part of a month to get around to it, I am confident following my review that this article qualifies as GA. Congratulations! Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 10:50, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    External links modified[edit]

    Hello fellow Wikipedians,

    I have just modified one external link on Kaga Rebellion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

    When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

    checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

    • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
    • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

    Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:18, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]