Talk:Sundae Girl
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Sundae Girl is currently a Language and literature good article nominee. Nominated by DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) at 15:46, 2 April 2026 (UTC) An editor has reviewed this article and has placed it on hold to allow improvements to be made to satisfy the good article criteria. Editors have seven days to address these issues. Improvements made in this period will influence the reviewer's decision whether or not to list the article as a good article. To view the review and add comments, click discuss review.
|
| This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Nominator: DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk · contribs) 15:46, 2 April 2026 (UTC)
GA review
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Sundae Girl/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Edward056686 (talk · contribs) 00:02, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
I will review this to fulfill my pledge at Talk:Menches/GA1. Edward056686 (talk) 00:02, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
Content and prose review
- Lead: This could be expanded, it’s very short.
- Publication: This section is very short, it would be good if you could expand them.
- The premise is also a short blurb and could be expanded.
Source spotchecks
- The website listing on BookTrust doesn’t seem like a full review and maybe shouldn’t be used that way.
- Are the reviews by Awesome Charlie and Ellie-May user generated? They look that way.
- Reference 15 seems like a good source, can you include any more information from it?
- Reference 16 is the product description on Scholastic, it shouldn’t be used for the reception.
No copyright violations or close paraphrasing that I see, and the cover art is correctly used. Edward056686 (talk) 00:36, 12 April 2026 (UTC)
General comments and score
| GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) |
|---|
|
|
Overall: |

