Talk:MIDI/GA1
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Iazyges (talk · contribs) 17:19, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
Will start soon. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 17:19, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
Criteria
[edit]GA Criteria
|
---|
GA Criteria:
|
- No DAB links
- No Dead links
- No missing citations :
Missing Citations
|
---|
|
- @GoAnimateFan199Pro: I am placing the article on hold per the large amount of uncited material; once that has been resolved we may continued with the review.
- @Iazyges: I think you should consider closing this. It's been open for months and the article is a very, very long way from GA. Popcornduff (talk) 17:21, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Prose suggestions
[edit]Comments and status query
[edit]The MOS:LEAD criterion doesn't seem to be met, in part due to the five-paragraph length (it's highly unusual for there to be more than four paragraphs per MOS:LEADLENGTH, even for a long article such as this one). The third paragraph reads like it comes from a spec, not an encyclopedic article; I recommend that it be recast so it doesn't read like part of a standards document.
There haven't been any edits by GoAnimateFan199Pro to the article since Iazyges posted the review nearly four weeks ago. That's quite a while. It's important that some sort of response be made very soon if GoAnimateFan199Pro wishes this review to remain open. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:54, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
- Whenever I get the chance this week, I will modify the noted errors. I apologize for my silent delay. GoAnimateFan199Pro (talk) 19:02, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
- UPDATE: After over a month, I have finally modified the article in an attempt to make it fit with the review. For the most part I removed unimportant claims, but for statements that I felt would be too important to remove (or it would interfere), I added a citation needed tag next to it. If that interferes with the review then feel free to either remove the statement or halt the review if necessary. GoAnimateFan199Pro (talk) 06:11, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- @GoAnimateFan199Pro: It will have to be either cited or removed. -- Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:34, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Alright, the uncited claims have been removed. GoAnimateFan199Pro (talk) 18:04, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- @GoAnimateFan199Pro: Since the removal of the uncited claims is contested on talk page, I will hold the review until consensus is developed; although consensus seems to point towards removing it. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 04:33, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for the heads up. GoAnimateFan199Pro (talk) 04:43, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
- @GoAnimateFan199Pro and Iazyges: Any update on progress here? It has been over five months since it was nominated. AIRcorn (talk) 23:00, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
- The "bold deletions" discussion in the talk page is not closed and does not seem to be finished despite lack of activity. I'm simply waiting for all of that to be sorted. GoAnimateFan199Pro (talk) 01:46, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- Apologies for letting this slip through the cracks. I have reviewed the disputed edits and posted detailed comments. I've expressed some general concerns about this nomination there also. ~Kvng (talk) 17:02, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Iazyges, perhaps you might continue the review, taking into account the replies here and on the article's talk page? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:03, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Areas still missing refs
[edit]- @GoAnimateFan199Pro: The following still need refs. Given that the consensus appears to be that these are worthy to stay, if they cannot be cited I will have to fail the review. If you are able to work on it now, I'm willing to hold the review open indefinitely, so long as work is still being done; if you are busy IRL, I can fail the review now and take up the new nomination whenever the article is ready. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 13:23, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
|
- Expect me to fix them by the time I come back from school today. That should take about a half hour to edit. GoAnimateFan199Pro (talk) 14:16, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
- Actually @Iazyges: never mind that. I was unfortunately not able to retrieve citations for every statement so I cannot continue with improvement on the article for now. Feel free to fail the review. GoAnimateFan199Pro (talk) 22:43, 5 September 2018 (UTC)