Jump to content

Talk:Thommy Berggren/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Greatuser (talk · contribs) 07:42, 1 January 2013 (UTC) I have reviewed some parts and i have found too many issues from only some parts, and it does not meet the criteria. Here are some points i have added below[reply]

  1. for having starred in.. it is not a meaningful sentence
  2. Red links need to be removed
    Red links do not need to be removed from anything. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 12:34, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Ref 08, e.g., these refs need publishers, accessdates if appropriate, author names, publication dates etc if appropriate... not just a website and/or names.
  4. Article lakes of Verifiability, see WP:V
  5. For each point Reference(s) need to be provided, so that it can be proved it's whether true or false
  6. Also there contains dead link, which goes against WP:V

and there are many other issues, I have not looked through the whole page yet. A Great User 07:51, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review list

[edit]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): 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, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail: