Any comments are welcome. LegoKontribsTalkM 22:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
The section about Child safety seems more like an advertisment even though all of them have proper citations. From that section:
The system uses a number of different approaches in order to maintain a high level of security. The key approaches include:
To me, "high level" is POV. Fixed
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- Semi-protection is for ip vandalism
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
On hold until criterion #4 is fixed. Passed, as #4 has been fixed.
LegoKontribsTalkM 23:40, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for that. I've reworded the child safety section so that it isn't a POV as it was - you were definitely correct about the wording. :) I considered moving some of the criticism into Child safety, (to join the "Orwellian dystopia" reference which was already there), but I thought that it may be better left in the "Reception and criticism" section. I'm happy to move it in there if you think it will provide more balance, though. - Bilby (talk) 03:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]