Talk:Sam Quek

Latest comment: 2 years ago by 92.234.248.213 in topic Children

GA Review edit

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sam Quek/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bait30 (talk · contribs) 20:27, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'll be reviewing this within the next week.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 20:27, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Lead edit

  • Lead looks good to me.

Early life edit

  • "(then) independent": should probably just be removed. I'm not sure this extra info about the school is useful in an article about Quek. Removing it would also fix a MOS:SEAOFBLUE issue. (3b)

Career edit

  • "and a few months later": I'm not sure what happened here because this is a new sentence, but it starts lowercase and with a coordinating conjunction. (1a)
  • "In 2020, she was announced...": saying that she was announced makes it seem like it hasn't happened yet, but later on it says she finished as a runner up. Should be reworded to be less confusing. (1a)
  • I've made those amendments. and some other small copyedits to the section. I've also changed the Celebrity Masterchef reference to one that shows she reached the final. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Personal life edit

  • seems good to me.

Images edit

  • Images are relevant and appropriately tagged.
  • For the Quek vs Argentina photo, I would recommend mentioning that Quek is the one on the right. (6b)

I'm done with the prose. I will review the references very soon.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 01:10, 26 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

References edit

  • All good.

 Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 02:54, 26 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for taking on the review and for your constructive comments, Bait30. Hopefully I've addressed your points; let me know if there is anything else to be done. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 09:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Checklist so far edit

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):   d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

Did you know nomination edit

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 23:04, 9 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

Improved to Good Article status by BennyOnTheLoose (talk). Nominated by Bait30 (talk) at 03:59, 31 October 2020 (UTC).Reply


General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall:  

  • The article was brought to GA status within seven days from the nomination. It is long enough, neutral and well-sourced. Earwig found one problematic website but it seems to be a direct copy form the article itself. The hook is within the character limit, it's content is interesting and is backed up by a reliable inline citation. QPQ also done. Image is published under a cc licence, used in the article and clear. I think this is good to go. Modussiccandi (talk) 20:59, 1 November 2020 (UTC)Reply


Children edit

She announced pregnant with 2nd child October 2021. And another section says was on WWTBAM Nov 2021 just 7 days after giving birth. Seems strange announcing pregnancy at 8.5 months. 92.234.248.213 (talk) 21:17, 4 March 2022 (UTC)Reply