Talk:Bikini in popular culture/GA1

GA nomination failed, mainly for inadequate sourcing and POV issues

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 02:04, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Auto-fail: There are multiple completely unsourced sections from a glance (one of which is tagged as such), another section tagged for needing more references, and many other uncited portions of text throughout the article. Make sure every paragraph ends with at least one citation, and if multiple sources are needed to support all of a paragraph's content, then add those accordingly. Another major problem is neutrality with the article's repeated use of "iconic", especially with a whole section titled "Iconic film bikinis" where whoever wrote that wasn't even trying to be subtle about their personal opinions on how those films featured bikinis. This term is puffery and frowned upon within articles outside of quotes/titles. The use of "notable" and "notably" are also inappropriate POV and editorializing. On another note, this is rather cluttered with images, and super short paragraphs/sections with just a sentence or two are discouraged as they make the flow of text feel choppy. The page unfortunately has a long way to go before it is worthy of GA status. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:04, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.