Talk:T-ara/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: AdabowtheSecond (talk · contribs) 03:20, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Will review comments to follow AdabowtheSecond (talk) 03:20, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Very interesting article, unfortunately, at first glance, this will require quite a bit of work to reach GA quality. Here are a few of the major issues:

Citations: A lot of the article is lacking citations. Every ref should be cited no bare urls.
Of the citations that are present, checklinks is showing that about 4 or so are dead. I'm skeptical of the reliability of some of the others, a couple links are to wordpress blogs, which are probably not reliable.
Another major issue is the prose quality. It looks like it will need a lot of copyediting to reach GA quality. Also, one, two, three sentence paragraphs really break the flow, these should be organized into larger paragraphs.
Fix disambiguation 1
Dead refs need replacing 1

This doesn't meet the quickfail standards, so I'm willing to leave this open for the customary week, although it will take a lot of work to get it there. AdabowtheSecond (talk) 03:30, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article has entire phrases without citations, several prose issues, etc. I would consider a quick fail in order for this article, so you can close it now if you wish. Also, you can point out several issues to provide a guidance to the nominator on how to improve the article. Regards. —Hahc 21 04:12, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Assessing this as an quikfail then. AdabowtheSecond (talk) 15:38, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]