Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Hello all. I'll be reviewing this article for GA. Right now, I'm planning on finishing my initial review today. Check back for my analysis.
Tim
meh
!(
review me) 17:03, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
I have read the lead section so far, and many of those citations are not needed. The citations for album sales and chart positions are redundant to the chart sales section and should be removed. Also, unless there's a direct quote, citations aren't needed for claiming what kind of reception the album got. Save those for the appropriate section in the article. Although the wording of the lead is good, many of the citations are not needed and are just redundant to those in the rest of the article. The lead section is supposed to summarize the article and show its importance, not present extra information. Tim meh !( review me) 21:05, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
There aren't any sources referenced in the Bonus tracks or Other formats sections. Tim meh !( review me) 23:13, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Hello all. I'll be reviewing this article for GA. Right now, I'm planning on finishing my initial review today. Check back for my analysis.
Tim
meh
!(
review me) 17:03, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
I have read the lead section so far, and many of those citations are not needed. The citations for album sales and chart positions are redundant to the chart sales section and should be removed. Also, unless there's a direct quote, citations aren't needed for claiming what kind of reception the album got. Save those for the appropriate section in the article. Although the wording of the lead is good, many of the citations are not needed and are just redundant to those in the rest of the article. The lead section is supposed to summarize the article and show its importance, not present extra information. Tim meh !( review me) 21:05, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
There aren't any sources referenced in the Bonus tracks or Other formats sections. Tim meh !( review me) 23:13, 16 May 2009 (UTC)