Talk:WSJ Magazine/GA1

GA Review

Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of September 26, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: A few run-on sentences and misuse of fragments/commas, etc. Some sentences could be copyedited/broken apart a bit. The very first sentence of the article is one example. The WP:LEAD is not really a summary of the entire article itself, rather it's just a few sentences about the magazine.

I think I got them all.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:47, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2. Factually accurate?: Duly cited throughout. One minor thing, one redlink among the cites, that could be fixed. Passes here.

Got it.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:39, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3. Broad in coverage?: Not thorough. What about how the magazine was initially received? Success in sales? Was the first issue critiqued by other journalists? Praised? There should be at least a whole subsection discussing this.

It was essentially given away so sales is not a significant factor here. Journalistic content was not critiqued as much as the business model. I have added information to that effect.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:27, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

4. Neutral point of view?: Appears to be written from a neutral perspective. Passes here.

5. Article stability? No issues at all in the article history or talk page. Passes here.

6. Images?: One image used, fair use rationale provided on the image page. Passes here.

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. Cirt (talk) 07:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reevaluation

GA passed. Nice work TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 03:30, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]