Talk:Release the Stars/GA1
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Another Believer in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
The article looks good. Here are some suggestions/questions for the GA process, if you have another opinion, just write it down:
Infobox
Done
|
---|
|
Lead
Done
|
---|
|
Conception and development
Done
|
---|
|
Singles
Done
|
---|
|
Songs and themes
Done
|
---|
|
Cover art and liner notes
Done
|
---|
|
Release the Stars world tour
Done
|
---|
|
Critical reception
Done
|
---|
|
Track listing
Done
|
---|
|
Chart positions and certifications
Done
|
---|
|
Awards and recognitions
Done
|
---|
|
Personnel
Done
|
---|
That info is from the booklet, perhaps note with an intro sentence that has a cite to it.
|
Hekerui (talk) 15:19, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks so much for taking the time to offer so many suggestions. I am striking out issues that have been addressed--hope you don't mind. I will be working a lot the next few days, but will do my best to make the changes as quickly as possible, but please be patient. I want the article to be as good as possible, and am more than willing to put in the time and effort. Thanks again! --Another Believer (Talk) 16:39, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Sure, take whatever time you want. Hekerui (talk) 17:42, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! Still working on it. Will get it done, slowly but surely. --Another Believer (Talk) 02:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
- Sure, take whatever time you want. Hekerui (talk) 17:42, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
- Just waiting on feedback and answers to questions before making additional edits. Hoping the article looks much better than before! --Another Believer (Talk) 18:59, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, didn't know. It looks much better. Hekerui (talk) 21:36, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- No problem! Will continue working on article... --Another Believer (Talk) 23:05, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, didn't know. It looks much better. Hekerui (talk) 21:36, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Finaly tally
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Pass. Good job! Hekerui (talk) 11:03, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you so much! I very much appreciate your time, suggestions, and assistance with improving the article. --Another Believer (Talk) 16:25, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.