Talk:CKMP-FM/GA1

Latest comment: 9 years ago by Neutralhomer in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: Neutralhomer (talk · contribs) 22:39, 13 January 2015 (UTC)Reply


GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:  
    Prose is fine, no copyvios, no problems with spelling or grammar.
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:  
    No problems here.
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:  
    No problems here.
    B. Citations to reliable sources, where necessary:  
    Reference #20 is 404'd, that will need changed. I would like to see a couple more references for the "breast implant" and "Bank It or Burn It" controversies. The second and fourth paragraphs of the "2014 'QuickHitz' re-launch" section, I feel, need a couple more references as well.
    C. No original research:  
    No OR.
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:  
    Covers the major aspects of the station....
    B. Focused:  
    ...while staying focused.
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:  
    Article written with an NPOV.
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:  
    No edit wars.
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:  
    A logo for the station is typically used on the page (within the infobox). One can be found here. If possible, a photo of the station's studio building would be nice, but not necessary.
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  
    No images provided.
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  
    Failed: Sorry, but with no movement on the article page or this GA page in the 48 hours since the review, I can't pass the article in it's current state. Please update the article with the above corrections and try again. - NeutralhomerTalk • 22:56, 15 January 2015 (UTC)Reply