Talk:Just a Kiss (song)/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 17:08, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I will start the review shortly. MathewTownsend (talk) 17:08, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:

   Confused about the "Music video"

   How does Brady awake Joy; when did she fall asleep - is some of this a dream sequence?

   Joy apparently dreams about her and her unprecedented boyfriend." ?? I'm not getting this.

   B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   Lede states:Professional reviews for "Just a Kiss" have been positive, commending on the song's theme and musical arrangement and also praising Lady Antebellum's performance.

   However, in the body of the article some critics have voiced negative views, not mentioned in the lede, giving the impression there were no criticisms.

   Since the lede should summarize the main points of the article, and since so much of the article is spent on the lyrics ("Background and writing" and "Music and lyrics", perhaps a few more summary statements regarding this would fulfill the criteria.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Provides references to all sources:

   B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Main aspects are addressed:

   B. Remains focused:

4. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   The article the overwhelmingly positive reviews are emphasized. Could negative or critical views be given more space for some balance?

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

MathewTownsend (talk) 17:09, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

• I have made some minor copy edits here.[1] Feel free to change anything you disagree with.
• Meanwhile, I'll put this on hold. The fixes are so minor I may fix them myself. MathewTownsend (talk) 19:37, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Reevaluation

1. Well written?: Pass

2. Factually accurate?: Pass

3. Broad in coverage?: Pass

4. Neutral point of view?: Pass

5. Article stability?: Pass

6. Images?: Pass

MathewTownsend (talk) 23:02, 28 December 2011 (UTC)