Talk:The Sensorites

I am aware that the information about one episode being postponed could have been put elsewhere, but to do this would necessitate a clumsy re-write of the weekly transmission details. The way I have written it still fits into the Doctor Who template well enough.

Masthead image deletion

Please note that the masthead image here, File:Sensorites.jpg is being discussed for deletion at Wikipedia:Non-free_content_review#File:Sensorites.jpg Andy Dingley (talk) 02:37, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Auldhouse (talk · contribs) 17:05, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

I'd be glad to review this article. Auldhouse (talk) 17:05, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   Yes. I ran the text through Grammarly and made a few minor copy-edits.

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   Yes. And sections also map nicely with other Dr. Who serial entries.

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: Pass

   Congratulations! Another GA article for Dr. Who.