Jump to content

Talk:Tiësto/GA3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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)[reply]

This article has a number of issues as noted above. Specifically as listed below. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 23:29, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be assessing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for reassessment.

Checking against GA criteria

[edit]
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. 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.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  • 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)[reply]
  • ref #6 [2] is a forum , not RS
- Replaced ASOTMKX (talk) 05:17, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ref #7 [3] is a wordpess blog, not an RS
- replaced ASOTMKX (talk) 05:30, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ref #8 [4] is a tripod.com site, not RS
- replaced ASOTMKX (talk) 05:39, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ref #9 [5] bebo is not an RS
- removed ASOTMKX (talk) 05:49, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ref #11 [6], what makes this a reliable source?
- removed ASOTMKX (talk) 06:12, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ref #12 [7], what makes this a reliable source?
- removed ASOTMKX (talk) 05:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ref #14 [8], no information supporting statement
- removed ASOTMKX (talk) 05:53, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ref #28 [9] Google Answers is not an RS
- removed ASOTMKX (talk) 06:05, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • In fact very few of the references here are RS, so I will delist immediately
  1. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Too much minutiae
  2. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    Article contains a large amount of fancruft, no critical reception
  3. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  4. 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?
  5. 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)[reply]