# Talk:Postal (comics)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Postal (comics)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Etzedek24 (talk · contribs) 21:31, 11 August 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): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

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): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Comments: It's very well done. A good synthesis of primary and secondary work. I removed a redlink and a citation about inserting black characters because the source didn't seem to have much to do with the article. It would benefit, I think, from maybe one or two more images, but the infobox is good enough for GAN. Props to you, Argento. Cheers, Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 22:11, 11 August 2018 (UTC)