Talk:Korn (album)/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: SMasters (talk) 15:18, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
- There are numerous grammar issues in the prose, some examples are given below. There are more - I will not list every single one. I suggest a third-party do a thorough copy edit of this. If you can't find anyone, you can try WP:GOCE/REQ.
- "Korn (promoted with a ya as KoЯn)" - Is that meant to be "pronounced"?
- Fixed
- "The band would records at Indigo Ranch Studios" - The band would "record".
- Fixed
- "Stephen Thomas Erlewine of allmusic..." - Allmusic is spelt with a capital 'A'.
- Fixed
- Common words such as "loitering" should not be wikified.
- Fixed
- There are three sentences, almost one ofter the other, that contain "began playing". Rephrase these to eliminate the constant repetition.
- Fixed
- "The equipment Korn used is what gave the music its it..." - its it
- Fixed
- All music GA chart numbers are written alphabetically and not numerically. E.g. charted at number seventy-two (not 72).
- Per WP:ORDINAL, it's unnecessary to spell out numbers greater than nine.
- I am aware of what WP:MOS says, however, as I have already mentioned, all GAs that I have seen to do with music, it has been insisted that music charts be spelt out alphabetically. See Madonna (Madonna album)#Chart performance as an example, and there are many more if you look. I can't find the exact place where it says this must be like this, perhaps it is from a discussion at one of the music projects, but I have been told that they must be this way. Please change these or I will need to get an second opinion. - SMasters (talk) 06:35, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, well I've fixed it. CrowzRSA 15:39, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for doing the fixes. SMasters (talk) 03:59, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- Okay, well I've fixed it. CrowzRSA 15:39, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- There are numerous grammar issues in the prose, some examples are given below. There are more - I will not list every single one. I suggest a third-party do a thorough copy edit of this. If you can't find anyone, you can try WP:GOCE/REQ.
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- Article is properly referenced and has no WP:OR.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- Article covers all major aspects and is focused.
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Article complies to WP:NPOV.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- Article is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Image tag checks out.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall: There are numerous grammar and punctuation issues in the prose, which need to be rectified before the article can be passed. I will allow up to 7 days for these to be fixed. - SMasters (talk) 15:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
- I've fixed everything you've asked, and I copyedited the page, and I think it looks good now. CrowzRSA 02:30, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for all the work done on the article. I am now confident that it now meets all the requirements for a GA and I am happy to pass it. Well done. – SMasters (talk) 03:59, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
- I've fixed everything you've asked, and I copyedited the page, and I think it looks good now. CrowzRSA 02:30, 26 March 2011 (UTC)