Jump to content

Talk:Madusa/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

I shall be reviewing this page against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:51, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quick fail criteria assessment

  1. The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
  2. The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
  3. There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.
  4. The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
  5. The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

No problems encountered when checking against the quick fail criteria, on to substantive review. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria

[edit]
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):
    • Lead: two successive sentences start with She later...;
    • 'Early career: six sentences start with She..., consider using her family name or varying the sentence structure to improve readability. This fault is common throughout the article.
    • Personal life: She also worked at Arby's ... I know that you have wikilinked Arby's but it would be better to explain e.g. She worked at an Arby's restaurant. I don't think that chain is quite as famous as MacDonalds. ...she released a CD of her singing in Japanese. Clumsy, suggest something like ...she released a CD of songs sung in Japanese.
    • Suggest a thorough copy-edit. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC) Green tickY[reply]
    b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its scope.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. 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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Thanks for the review. I have copyedited the article, specifically focusing on sentence structure. Is it sufficient? Nikki311 02:51, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]