# Talk:Lady & Peebles

This review is transcluded from Talk:Lady & Peebles/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 01:51, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
Nominator: Gen. Quon (Talk)
Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have my full review up shortly. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 01:51, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

1: Well-written

a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors: 
b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: 

2: Verifiable with no original research

a. Has an appropriate reference section:  Yes
b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:  excellent (Thorough check on Google. Cross-checked with other GAs)

c. No original research:   Done

3: Broad in its coverage

4: Neutral

5: Stable: No edit wars, etc:  Yes
6: Images  Done (Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license)

 As per the above checklist, the issues identified are :

 The lead does not provide an accessible overview for the Plot and the Reception sections
 The lead does not give relative emphasis to the Reception as is given in the body .
 Lady & Peebles should be in bold in the first sentence of the lead .
 1a issue: "investigate an mysterious black ice cave" in the Plot .

This article is a very promising GA nominee. I'm glad to see your work here. I'm putting the article on hold. All the best! --Seabuckthorn ♥ 19:12, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the review. How do these edits look?--Gen. Quon (Talk)  01:31, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
Good. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 01:52, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
OK, everything looks good now. Passing the article to GA status. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 01:52, 12 January 2014 (UTC)