From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Coemgenus ( talk · contribs) 15:01, 28 January 2015 (UTC) reply

I'll review this over the next few days. -- Coemgenus ( talk) 15:01, 28 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Checklist

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b ( MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a ( reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c ( OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a ( major aspects): b ( focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b ( appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Comments

  • In general, this looks very good. Citations, stability, NPOV, and breadth of coverage are all good. Images are all fair use, and I think the fair use rationales are appropriate.
  • The "World tour" section has some issues with tense. At time it sounds like you're writing as if the tour is ongoing.
  • "Critical reception" has the same problem in places. ("He adds" rather than "he added," for example.)
  • There are some one-sentence paragraphs in the last section that could probably be combined.
Coemgenus, all three done. Lapadite ( talk) 04:02, 29 January 2015 (UTC) reply
I made a few more minor changes, but I think there's nothing else that needs fixing. Great article, I'm happy to promote it. -- Coemgenus ( talk) 13:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC) reply
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Coemgenus ( talk · contribs) 15:01, 28 January 2015 (UTC) reply

I'll review this over the next few days. -- Coemgenus ( talk) 15:01, 28 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Checklist

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b ( MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a ( reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c ( OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a ( major aspects): b ( focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b ( appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Comments

  • In general, this looks very good. Citations, stability, NPOV, and breadth of coverage are all good. Images are all fair use, and I think the fair use rationales are appropriate.
  • The "World tour" section has some issues with tense. At time it sounds like you're writing as if the tour is ongoing.
  • "Critical reception" has the same problem in places. ("He adds" rather than "he added," for example.)
  • There are some one-sentence paragraphs in the last section that could probably be combined.
Coemgenus, all three done. Lapadite ( talk) 04:02, 29 January 2015 (UTC) reply
I made a few more minor changes, but I think there's nothing else that needs fixing. Great article, I'm happy to promote it. -- Coemgenus ( talk) 13:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook