# Talk:The Banquet (Parks and Recreation)

I don't want to create another EC, but this seems to be part of The Journal News, so it's probably reliable. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 04:52, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Banquet (Parks and Recreation)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
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: 

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 
In the Production section, "can't" ---> "cannot".
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: 

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:Parks and recreation the banquet.jpg needs a lower resolution
B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
Not much to do. I fixed two things in the article, I assumed good faith. If the issues above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck!
--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

OK, think I got them all. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn (c) 17:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, you did. Thank you to Hunter K. 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) 21:18, 7 July 2009 (UTC)