Talk:Revolution Software/GA2

1. It is well written.

   a (prose): b (

   lists

   ):

   The lead adequately summarises the article, see

   WP:LEAD

   The prose good, it is "reasonably well written".

   It's well organised, information is presented logically. Please read

   WP:MoS

   and subpages.

2. It is accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to

   reliable sources): c (OR

   ):

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Fair representation without bias:

3. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   stable

b (appropriate use with

suitable captions

):

1. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Shoddily put together, please read the

   good article criteria and make sure that this article meetrs them before renominating. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

   ]

This artcile has not been reviewed. 7arazred simply copied and pasted Talk:Revolution Software/GA1 altering the failure points to passes. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:24, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconding the above just for the record. Apparently nominated by

TALK 14:30, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]