# Talk:What Did You Eat Yesterday?

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/review/what-did-you-eat-yesterday/gn-1
Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 17:33, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I see there's been some edit warring between Bovineboy2008 and 240D:1A:4B5:2800:A4E0:4F91:5B58:3896 over the inclusion of the Category:2021 films and Category:Upcoming films on this page. Please discuss this matter here before making any further revisions to this page. Also note that while this article primarily covers the What Did You Eat Yesterday manga series, it also covers its live-action film adaptation slated for release in 2021. Morgan695 (talk) 15:50, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't think that it would be appropriate to include the film categories on this article. We do not include film categories on book series that have adaptations, nor even franchise articles. Those categories would be better suited for a separate article, if one should exist.
And I apologize, I didn't realize that we were edit warring. I don't watch this article, just the Category:Upcoming films, and I didn't realize that I had removed it so many times from this article. BOVINEBOY2008 16:06, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:What Did You Eat Yesterday?/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: No Great Shaker (talk · contribs) 15:38, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
I'll review this as it's the oldest one in the list. Hope to provide some feedback soon. No Great Shaker (talk) 15:38, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

GACR#1a. Well written: the prose is clear, concise and understandable. 
GACR#1a. Well written: the spelling and grammar are correct. 
GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for lead sections. 
GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for article structure and layout. 
GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for words to watch. 
GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for writing about fiction. 
GACR#1b. Complies with the MOS guidelines for list incorporation. 
GACR#2a. Contains a list of all references in accordance with the layout style guideline. 
GACR#2b. All statements are verifiable with inline citations provided. 
GACR#2b. All inline citations are from reliable sources, etc. 
GACR#2b. All quotations are cited and their usage complies with MOS guidelines. 
GACR#2c. No original research. 
GACR#2d. No copyright violations or plagiarism. 
GACR#3. Broad in its coverage but within scope and in summary style. 
GACR#4. Neutral (NPOV). 
GACR#5. Stable. 
GACR#6a. Images are at least fair use and do not breach copyright. 
GACR#6b. Images are relevant to the topic with appropriate captions. 
Hello, Morgan695, I'll use the criteria checklist above to mark progress. No Great Shaker (talk) 15:47, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
I've checked the image which is fine as fair use and the article is certainly stable so that disposes of GACR#5 & GACR#6. Will be doing a full read next. No Great Shaker (talk) 10:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
I've read the article a couple of times and it's good to go so I'm promoting it to GA. I just resorted the categories for ease of use. It's only a short article but there's a lot of information in there and all within scope, so it passes WP:GACR#3 without any difficulty. Sources seem to be satisfactory and it's well written. So, it's a good article. Well done. No Great Shaker (talk) 20:11, 11 October 2020 (UTC)