# Talk:A Very Supernatural Christmas

This review is transcluded from Talk:A Very Supernatural Christmas/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:34, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.
Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 
In the lead, "While critics universally praised the flashback sequences and the performances of Ford and Ridge", shouldn't it be ---> "While critics universally praised the flashback sequences and the performances of Ford and Canipe"? In the Plot, "Further investigation and research leads to the discovery leads the brothers to Edward (Garrett) and Madge Carrigan (Gann)", to me this sentence reads kinda odd. Again, it's just me.
Both fixed. Ωphois 04:17, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Check.
B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 
In the Reception section, "TV Guide" needs to be italicized, since it's a magazine.
It's from the website, not the magazine. Ωphois 04:17, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
It's like saying that your link from the Chicago Tribune is from the website, and not the newspaper.
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline: 
In Refs. 1 and 12, "TV Guide" needs to be in the "work" format of the source.
Same as above. Ωphois 04:17, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose): 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 

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): 

Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 

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

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content: 
File:Christmaspres.JPG needs a lower resolution.
Replaced with free file uploaded to Commons.Ωphois 04:17, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
Not that much to do. If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!
--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:34, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you to Ophois for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:53, 10 June 2010 (UTC)