Talk:Madusa/GA1

GA Review

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

The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.
The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
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

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)~~ Y[reply]
b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):
I fixed one deadlink using CheckLinks. References check out. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
It is broad in its scope.
a (major aspects):
b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It 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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
~~OK, the prose as noted above needs copy-editing. On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)~~ Y[reply]

Wow! Much improved. I am happy to confirm that this article deserves Ga status. Thanks for your hard work. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:05, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. I have copyedited the article, specifically focusing on sentence structure. Is it sufficient? Nikki♥311 02:51, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]