WABN has been listed as one of the
Media and drama 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. Review: March 29, 2016. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is progressing nicely, with a good lead section and strong history info. I'm no expert on radio articles, but it seems to me that the article needs a section about the station's programming. I see the article as a solid C/borderline B - I think it just needs a section on programming to push it to solid B class.-- Mojo Hand ( talk) 16:37, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Numerounovedant ( talk · contribs) 07:47, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Will put up comments shortly!
It's a nice article and a good read, I have some early concerns. It's researched well and I feel with some small changes it should be good to go!
These are just some stray observations I'll go through the prose once again, once I acquaint myself with the topic more! Numerounovedant Talk 08:47, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
I really wished the article could be expanded! But from what I see the article has no issues with what it has right now. It looks in good state. See if there is anything at all you can add to it! Numerounovedant Talk 18:07, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
@ Neutralhomer: I really wish we (well mostly you and the contributors of the article, because I haven't really done anything here) could do more with this one, but I a glad to see a well maintained article despite the lack of information sources for the topic. Great work on that! Numerounovedant Talk 08:20, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
WABN has been listed as one of the
Media and drama 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. Review: March 29, 2016. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is progressing nicely, with a good lead section and strong history info. I'm no expert on radio articles, but it seems to me that the article needs a section about the station's programming. I see the article as a solid C/borderline B - I think it just needs a section on programming to push it to solid B class.-- Mojo Hand ( talk) 16:37, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Numerounovedant ( talk · contribs) 07:47, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Will put up comments shortly!
It's a nice article and a good read, I have some early concerns. It's researched well and I feel with some small changes it should be good to go!
These are just some stray observations I'll go through the prose once again, once I acquaint myself with the topic more! Numerounovedant Talk 08:47, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
I really wished the article could be expanded! But from what I see the article has no issues with what it has right now. It looks in good state. See if there is anything at all you can add to it! Numerounovedant Talk 18:07, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
@ Neutralhomer: I really wish we (well mostly you and the contributors of the article, because I haven't really done anything here) could do more with this one, but I a glad to see a well maintained article despite the lack of information sources for the topic. Great work on that! Numerounovedant Talk 08:20, 29 March 2016 (UTC)