Talk:Mighty Jill Off/GA2

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Judgesurreal777 (talk · contribs) 19:29, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article Review by Judgesurreal777[edit]

Let me know if you need clarification or help with my notes. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:54, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. 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).	What is the reliability of One Switch as a source?
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Pending
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Are there any concept art images?
	7. Overall assessment.	Article now well deserving of a GA symbol!

As New Age Retro Hippie seems to be MIA for the past while, I'm going to take over for him in fixing the issues. --Pres N 20:12, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the oneswitch source (the info was covered in the other citation); Added a bit to the development paragraph; Doesn't look like there's any reception for the jill off harder edition out there from RS's; added a concept art image- I think it might even be the one that actually directly referenced in the article, but it's hard to say. --Pres N 20:41, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent job! Our nominating wikipedian owes you a barnstar, I'll be watching! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:48, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]