Talk:Guitar Hero: On Tour/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ha dg er 04:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC) I completed the review of the article. I didn't find many errors, and I can tell that it was worked hard on to come to what the article looks like now. Here is my review:[reply]

It is reasonably well written.

This article follows the manual of style. It has great grammar and spelling . This article is reasonably well written. --Ha dg er 04:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is factually accurate and verifiable.

This article contains reliable sources and is well-sourced. It contains many references where appropriate. There isn't any original resource (which means that there are no sources that an editor made himself/herself). This article is factually accurate and verifiable. --Ha dg er 04:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is broad in its coverage.

This article stays on-topic and contains relevant information. It doesn't give out information about review companies (which is a good thing). This article is broad in its coverage. --Ha dg er 04:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It follows the neutral point of view policy.

This article doesn't contain opinions, but instead contains facts about opinions (which again, is a good thing). It doesn't contain many of the words to avoid. This article follows the neutral point of view policy. --Ha dg er 04:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is stable.

I haven't seen edit wars or any other conflict that would harm the article in the history of the article. This article is stable. --Ha dg er 04:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It contains images, where possible, to illustrate each topic.

About all of the images are free and are pictures that are related to the topic of the section. It does not lack images. Each caption explains the picture. This article contains images that illustrate each topic. --Ha dg er 04:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Overall

Pass/Fail: Pass

This article is a very good article. It clearly explains topics. It contains quotation marks around statements made by other people and contains sources for them. I can't find any issues that really need to be fixed. In fact, I can't find any issues in the article. This is a very good article. --Ha dg er 04:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Passed as a Good Article: The current revision of this article was easily passed as a Good Article. It must have been worked very hard on, and the hard work really made it easy to pass as a Good Article. Maybe it can be nominated for a featured article. Actually, I think it can be nominated right at this article's current status. I'm a good article reviewer, though, so I can't give it that status. This article is a very good article. --Ha dg er 04:37, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]