Talk:Medina/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: TheSpecialUser (talk · contribs) 00:39, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
Since I'm busy with real life, I've been doing reviews which can only be completed at a glance. I'm sorry to say but this article is far away from GA standards. Here are the 3 basic reasons behind it:
- The article is of 22K words but still I feel that a topic like this needs additional 10-20K words or more. Many paragraphs are of one-two lines and many sections need expansion like "Character" and "Climate"
- Few things which are in the lead are not covered in the later part of the article which is a problem. Anything in the lead should be covered later in the article with more details and lead should be summary of the article per WP:LEAD. The article is not at all summarized by the lead and the lead is full of WP:POV sort of things.
- Neutrality of the article appears to be disputed as many facts are presented in a promotional manner and they need to be neutralized and presented in a WP:NPOV manner.
- Grammar and similar issues seems to be existing and the article is in need of copyediting throughout.
- There is lack of refs. This is the main reason for the failure. The article is full of unsourced material and thus it is extremely tough to verify the content and to track down any vandalism. We need references to WP:RS in order to verify the content and this article has 70% of its content as unsourced. To get this up to GA level, each and every fact in the article should have at least one reliable source using well formatted citation.
Unfortunately, these issues cannot be addressed in 3-4 months as the issues are too many and pretty big. Sorry to say but I've to quickly fail it. Once addressed the issues raised above, anyone can go for another nom. Thanks! TheSpecialUser TSU 00:39, 27 October 2012 (UTC)