![]() | Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Shinee article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 30 days
![]() |
![]() | Shinee has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: No Great Shaker ( talk · contribs) 15:13, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, BaaBaaTheSheep. Hope you are okay. I'll pick this review up and will hopefully have some feedback for you soon. All the best. No Great Shaker ( talk) 15:13, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
I'll use this checklist as I go along. No Great Shaker ( talk) 16:34, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
I've made a start by reading it quickly to get a feel for the article. I've checked the images which all appear to be at least fair use. The article is stable, its layout is okay and the short list sections are okay. I need to do an in-depth read next to check the main criteria. Hoping to be back later this week. No Great Shaker ( talk) 13:33, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
I've managed to create a spare time slot and decided to fit this in as I was already quite confident about its chances. A great deal of work has gone into the article and it contains a massive amount of information, but it is all within scope and essentially presented as a summary. The prose is fine so, although there's a lot to take in, it's an enjoyable read and I've learned a bit about a group I was not at all familiar with – I'd like to hear them now! I couldn't see any spelling errors and you haven't used any dubious words or expressions. The terminology is okay and I can't see any copyright issues.
I do have just a couple of points for you to consider.
You might want to check your singulars and plurals – for example, "Shinee is known for their fashion style", which is a mixture of the two. It should be either "they are known for their" or "it is known for its". You need to decide if Shinee are a they or if Shinee is an it and then be consistent throughout. This is a very minor point of grammar, though, and I'm not going to fail a GA review for something like that, but it would be an issue if you decide to take the article to WP:FAC.
While I'm happy that the article complies with WP:NOR and WP:NPOV, I have to take WP:V on trust because there's no way I can comment on the WP:RS of the many Korean sources. However, I have no reason to doubt the sources and you have obviously worked hard to ensure that everything is sourced. Citation style and details are good.
Having said all that, this is a good article and I'm passing it. I'll do the necessary at WP:GA/MU. Well done. All the best and look after yourselves. No Great Shaker ( talk) 15:11, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
![]() | Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Shinee article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 30 days
![]() |
![]() | Shinee has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: No Great Shaker ( talk · contribs) 15:13, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello, BaaBaaTheSheep. Hope you are okay. I'll pick this review up and will hopefully have some feedback for you soon. All the best. No Great Shaker ( talk) 15:13, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
I'll use this checklist as I go along. No Great Shaker ( talk) 16:34, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
I've made a start by reading it quickly to get a feel for the article. I've checked the images which all appear to be at least fair use. The article is stable, its layout is okay and the short list sections are okay. I need to do an in-depth read next to check the main criteria. Hoping to be back later this week. No Great Shaker ( talk) 13:33, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
I've managed to create a spare time slot and decided to fit this in as I was already quite confident about its chances. A great deal of work has gone into the article and it contains a massive amount of information, but it is all within scope and essentially presented as a summary. The prose is fine so, although there's a lot to take in, it's an enjoyable read and I've learned a bit about a group I was not at all familiar with – I'd like to hear them now! I couldn't see any spelling errors and you haven't used any dubious words or expressions. The terminology is okay and I can't see any copyright issues.
I do have just a couple of points for you to consider.
You might want to check your singulars and plurals – for example, "Shinee is known for their fashion style", which is a mixture of the two. It should be either "they are known for their" or "it is known for its". You need to decide if Shinee are a they or if Shinee is an it and then be consistent throughout. This is a very minor point of grammar, though, and I'm not going to fail a GA review for something like that, but it would be an issue if you decide to take the article to WP:FAC.
While I'm happy that the article complies with WP:NOR and WP:NPOV, I have to take WP:V on trust because there's no way I can comment on the WP:RS of the many Korean sources. However, I have no reason to doubt the sources and you have obviously worked hard to ensure that everything is sourced. Citation style and details are good.
Having said all that, this is a good article and I'm passing it. I'll do the necessary at WP:GA/MU. Well done. All the best and look after yourselves. No Great Shaker ( talk) 15:11, 15 February 2022 (UTC)