Talk:Acafellas/GA1

Latest comment: 14 years ago by ThinkBlue in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:02, 12 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:  
    This is me, it wouldn't hurt adding "singer" to Josh Groban in the lead or in the Plot. I mean, I don't believe everyone is familiar with who Josh Groban is, you know. Again, just me. In the Production section, "'Bust Your Windows' also features on the album Glee: The Music, Volume 1", do you mean ---> "'Bust Your Windows' is also featured on the Glee: The Music, Volume 1 album"? In the Reception section, "Shawna Malcolm criticized characterization in the episode", I believe a word is missing.
    Check.
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:  
    In the lead, the Rachel Ray comment should have the source after the quote has concluded, per WP:Lead and WP:MOSQUOTE.
    Check.
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:  
    There's a dead link.
    Check.
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):  
    C. It contains no original research:  
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:  
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:  
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):  
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:  
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:  
    Not that good.
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:  
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  
    Not that much to do! If the above concerns can be addressed, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:02, 12 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your review! I've added "singer" to Josh Groban, changed the Production sentence to your suggested wording and clarified that Malcom specifically criticized Terri & Will's characterization in the episode. The Rachel Ray comment in the lead is now referenced, and I've fixed the dead link. Finally, re: the stability, I don't think it's a problem. There was a small back and forth yesterday when User:Tommyjgrimshaw added/changed ratings in several articles without sources, but I dropped a note on his talkpage, he came back and added sources and that was the end of it :) Thanks again! Frickative 20:31, 12 February 2010 (UTC)Reply
You are welcome for it, just doing my part as a reviewer. Everything looks good. Good, cause I was a bit worried that an edit conflict was starting, but thank you for explaining that. Getting down to business, I would like to thank Frickative for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:45, 12 February 2010 (UTC)Reply