Talk:Tiësto/GA3
Appearance
GA Reassessment
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
The main criteria it fails is sourcing/verfiability. Currently has a lot of broken links, i noted this on talk page a little while ago - have tried to fix but more difficult than normal as the sites originally used seem to be discontinued. Article also has style tag. Tom B (talk) 16:33, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
- This article has a number of issues as noted above. Specifically as listed below. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 23:29, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
I shall be assessing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for reassessment.
Checking against GA criteria
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- Contains too much un-encyclopaedic information. Needs to be completely rewritten in a neutral encyclopaedic style.
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- a (references):
- Seven dead links have been tagged for some time.
- ref #2 [1], what makes this a reliable source?
- - Replaced ASOTMKX (talk) 05:17, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- ref #6 [2] is a forum , not RS
- - Replaced ASOTMKX (talk) 05:17, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- ref #7 [3] is a wordpess blog, not an RS
- - replaced ASOTMKX (talk) 05:30, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- ref #8 [4] is a tripod.com site, not RS
- - replaced ASOTMKX (talk) 05:39, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- ref #9 [5] bebo is not an RS
- - removed ASOTMKX (talk) 05:49, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- ref #11 [6], what makes this a reliable source?
- - removed ASOTMKX (talk) 06:12, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- ref #12 [7], what makes this a reliable source?
- - removed ASOTMKX (talk) 05:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- ref #14 [8], no information supporting statement
- - removed ASOTMKX (talk) 05:53, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- ref #28 [9] Google Answers is not an RS
- - removed ASOTMKX (talk) 06:05, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- In fact very few of the references here are RS, so I will delist immediately
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- Too much minutiae
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Article contains a large amount of fancruft, no critical reception
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- What encyclopaedic content is aded by File:Tiesto at london 02 arena.jpg and File:Olympic flame at opening ceremony.jpg?
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Quickfail on grounds of a large number of unreliable sources. Note also the outstanding fancruft tag, which has not been addressed. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:10, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail: