Talk:Alia Bhatt/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Shshshsh (talk · contribs) 20:39, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

   Very well written, I took the liberty of copyediting some parts.

   b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   This should in no way stand in the way of promotion, but please take care of MOS:CONFORMTITLE in citations (titles should be italicised).

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

   Consistency is not mandatory here, but please do try to make it consistent towards the FAC - example, NDTV is sometimes italicised, and sometimes not.

   b. (citations to reliable sources):

   c. (OR):

   d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

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:

   Measured and well-balanced, and she's a big star, so it's quite a challenge.

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 non-free use rationales):

   Free images are spread across the article and are well-placed.

   b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

   A very good article - informative, insightful and comprehensive. I believe it could well be up for FAC at this stage.

(Criteria marked are unassessed)