GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Nominator: FuzzyMagma ( talk · contribs) 12:22, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
Reviewer: Adabow ( talk · contribs) 23:33, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | |
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | some questions about sources below |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | File:Julius Malema 2011-09-14.jpg is released under cc-sa licence |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. |
fixed.
Fixed by adding a source for the information in brackets
I have now added Oxford and Collins Dictionary too
28 (now 29) is a BBC video on YouTube. 29 (was 30) is surely self published, thus the sentence was removed.
37 is a link to the song itself on YouTube, replaced by 39 which mention the song. add new 40 and 41 commenting on the song itself. I got the release date wrong also, it should be 1993 and not 2004. I confused it withLolilo - Makwerekwere (really bad song)
I'm playing the review on hold while the comments I've made above are considered. Adabow ( talk) 00:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Nominator: FuzzyMagma ( talk · contribs) 12:22, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
Reviewer: Adabow ( talk · contribs) 23:33, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | |
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | some questions about sources below |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | File:Julius Malema 2011-09-14.jpg is released under cc-sa licence |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. |
fixed.
Fixed by adding a source for the information in brackets
I have now added Oxford and Collins Dictionary too
28 (now 29) is a BBC video on YouTube. 29 (was 30) is surely self published, thus the sentence was removed.
37 is a link to the song itself on YouTube, replaced by 39 which mention the song. add new 40 and 41 commenting on the song itself. I got the release date wrong also, it should be 1993 and not 2004. I confused it withLolilo - Makwerekwere (really bad song)
I'm playing the review on hold while the comments I've made above are considered. Adabow ( talk) 00:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)