# Talk:Kimberly Anyadike

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kimberly Anyadike/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Codyorb (talk · contribs) 18:11, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Beginning the GA review for Kimberly Anyadike. Codyorb (talk) 18:11, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
Prose is clear and well written, with appropriately sized paragraphs.a  There are no obvious spelling or grammar errors. No apparent violations of MOS.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 
Reliable citations are used throughout the article. No plagiarism or original content found.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Article is comprehensive. It does not leave out any major details and does not go into unnecessary detail.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
No bias found in the article
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 
Article is stable.
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): 
All images are appropriately used and licensed.
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Codyorb (talk) 20:50, 13 February 2018 (UTC)


### Review reopened
Per a discussion at Codyorb's talk page, this review is being reopened, and further work will include contributions from Mike Christie, who has agreed to give a second opinion on the state of the article, given that Codyorb is new at reviewing, and some issues came to light. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:01, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


### Re-review by Mike Christie
The lead is too short; it should be a summary of the article.  Currently it omits some significant information.
Other than that I think the article is ready for promotion to GA.  A note for future reference: Earwig found this, but it appears that article was taken from Wikipedia, rather than the other way around. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 10:21, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm currently trying to expand the lead with information from the body of the article. Codyorb (talk) 16:01, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
I've expanded the lead section to 2 paragraphs. Codyorb (talk) 18:36, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, Codyorb.  I've modified it a bit; the most important facts about her relate to the flight, so I cut some of the biographical material you added and put in a bit more about the flight.  This looks good enough now, so I am promoting the article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 12:47, 17 February 2018 (UTC)