Talk:Ethel Barrymore Theatre/GA1
GA Review[edit]
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 11:21, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
This looks like a well-researched article from Epicgenius. At first glance, it looks close to Good Article status with little modification needed. I will start a review shortly. simongraham (talk) 11:21, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Comments[edit]
This is a stable and well-written article. 97.1% of authorship is by Epicgenius. It is currently ranked B class and appeared as in the Did You Know column on 21 January 2022.
- The article is of appropriate length, 4,299 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 eight contributions to the selection, without which it would not have anywhere as much impact.
- Earwig's Copyvio Detector identifies a 32.9% chance of copyright violation, confirming that there is a low likelihood. The highest correlation is with the theatre's entry in the Landmarks Preservation Commission report.
- There is a single missing space which I have corrected.
- There are no obvious grammar or spelling errors.
This article is ready for assessment. simongraham (talk) 13:51, 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 ffocused 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:. Well done. You have another article that meets the criteria to be a Good Article.
Pass simongraham (talk) 13:52, 29 January 2022 (UTC)