Talk:The Restoration (1910 film)

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

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Restoration (1910 film)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 19:18, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Don't worry, we'll get through these JAGUAR  19:18, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguations: No links found.

Linkrot: No linkrot found in this article.

Checking against GA criteria[edit]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    I would recommend splitting the lead into two paragraphs to make the lead more balanced, per WP:LEAD
    "Little is known of the production credits, but the film does feature Marie Eline as the little girl" - could be re-worded so Marie Eline is mentioned first
    Nothing on production in the lead?
    "The writer of the scenario is unknown, but it was most likely Lloyd Lonergan" - this needs a citation
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

The reception section is very well detailed, so this one should come to a pass like the rest. Well done JAGUAR  20:55, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]