Talk:6ix9ine/GA1

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Heartfox in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Heartfox (talk · contribs) 03:57, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

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 non-free use rationales):  
    b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/fail:  
    This article cites several sources that are unreliable, especially for a BLP (TMZ, New York Post, Mirror etc.). Some references even lack publisher information. As this article is a ways away from meeting WP:V, I am quick-failing the nomination. Consider doing a thorough review of the references section to determine what needs to be improved.

(Criteria marked   are unassessed)