Talk:Albania in the Eurovision Song Contest 2008/GA1

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 15:03, 21 January 2021 (UTC)Reply


Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose ( ) 1b. MoS ( ) 2a. ref layout ( ) 2b. cites WP:RS ( ) 2c. no WP:OR ( ) 2d. no WP:CV ( )
3a. broadness ( ) 3b. focus ( ) 4. neutral ( ) 5. stable ( ) 6a. free or tagged images ( ) 6b. pics relevant ( )
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked   are unassessed

I will review this later today; hopefully it can mark a nomination of yours becoming a GA the same day as my review! --K. Peake 15:03, 21 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Infobox and lead

edit
  • Infobox looks good!
  • Target Radio Televizioni Shqiptar to RTSH
  • "to compete in the final." → "to compete in the grand final." with the target
  • "In the grand final" → "In the final"

Background

edit
  • Good

Before Eurovision

edit

Festivali i Këngës

edit
Competing entries
edit
  • Good
Shows
edit
Semi-finals
edit
  • "featured guest performance from Albanian Elita 5." → "featured a guest performance from Albanian rock band Elita 5." with the target; looks like you were going to finish the introduction to them but forgot
  • Artist → Artist(s)
Final
edit

At Eurovision

edit
  • Img is a neat addition and it looks good!
  • "and the final on" → "and the grand final on" with the target
  • "in one of the two semi-finals." → "in one of the two."
  • "although Albania was placed" → "with Albania being placed" since this is not in spite of the fact the draw was held for countries
  • Target second to Eurovision Song Contest 2008#Semi-final 2
  • "it was announced that it" → "it was announced that Albania"

Voting

edit
  • "Albania finished in 17th position," → "Albania finished in 17th place,"
Points awarded to Albania
edit
  • Good
Points awarded by Albania
edit
  • Good

References

edit

Final comments and verdict

edit
Thanks Kyle Peake, I responded to all your comments.--Lorik17 (talk) 17:36, 21 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
Lorik2017 Very quick for you to get to it after my review of this article, plus it's been great to see that you have been baring my previous suggestions in mind while preparing these articles for GA status.  Pass now, awesome that this became a GA on the day of my review! --K. Peake 17:49, 21 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
I'm also looking forward to work with you Kyle Peake on other related articles. Thanks for your correctness :)--Lorik17 (talk) 20:36, 21 January 2021 (UTC)Reply