Talk:Everytime tha Beat Drop/GA1
GA Review[edit]
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Adabow (talk · contribs) 02:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
The article has the basics, but needs a lot of work to get to GA standard. I will place the article on hold, but I don't think I will end up passing it. Surprise me, though :P Adabow (talk · contribs) 02:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- needs a quick copy-edit to make sure all sentences are gramatically correct. Please see MOS:ITALICS, too
- B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
- lead contains new information
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- entire sections are unreferenced
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- While it has a pretty decent background section, there is nothing on composition and critical reception
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Cover is too big, sound file needs to be trimmed and be of lower quality
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- pretty good, maybe you could add an image of Dupri?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
- Formats and tracklistings completely unsourced.
- Credits and personnel completely unsourced.
- Release history poorly written, WP:LEAK violation, not formatted correctly, capitalization issues and unsourced.
- Chart performance is poorly written, has some sources, not neither enough and the information in the sources does not state what you have. You also have reception in there, this is not allowed.
This article should not be passed. It is not GA ready. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 04:22, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
- Because of the lack of action I am failing the article. For further advice on how to improve the article you may want to submit to peer review before renominating to WP:GAN. Adabow (talk · contribs) 23:02, 12 December 2010 (UTC)