Talk:Talang 2007/GA1

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

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 23:57, 11 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Checking against GA criteria

edit
GA review (see here for criteria)
I am sorry that you have had to wait so long for a review, but as this nomination had not been listed at WP:GAN, no-one knew that you were seeking review. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:00, 12 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
    I made a number of copy-edits, also adding citation and other tags. [1]
    Apart from that, the prose is "reasonably well written".
    Article is sufficiently MoS compliant
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
    I fixed three and tagged three dead links, using WP:CHECKLINKS.
    There are some statements that I tagged as needing citations.
    Those references that I could access were verifiable,reliable sources.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
    The article covers the subject in reasonable depth and is focussed upon it.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
    There are a few unsupported statements that I tagged as lacking a WP:NPOV.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  
    On hold for seven days, for above issues to be addressed. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 01:04, 12 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
    I note that the nominator is blocked indefinitely so I shall fail this nomination as they cannot address the issues raised. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 01:18, 12 April 2010 (UTC)Reply