Talk:Symphony No. 5 (Nielsen)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 08:54, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Starting review. Pyrotec (talk) 08:54, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

A well-written, well-referenced article. The WP:Lead is rather sparse. It acts as an Introduction, which is one of its functions, but is not all that good at providing a summary of the main points, which is its other function.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

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:

Overall, I'm marking this article as GA-compliant. The WP:Lead however is rather weak: I suggest that it is expanded - there is no mention of performances, for example. Pyrotec (talk) 09:36, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I was going to say the same about the lead, please expand it a little. Congrats, OboeCrack (talk) 15:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)