Talk:Birthday Cake (song)/GA1

Latest comment: 12 years ago by Hahc21 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 04:33, 18 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Review

edit

Original interlude

edit
Composition and lyrics
  • "1:18 (one minute, 18 seconds)" >> "one minute and 18 seconds" (spell out numbers less than 10 and avoid redundancy)
      Done Aaron You Da One
  • "your younger fans need more SUBSTANCE." >> a [sic] is needed after substance.
      Done Aaron You Da One

Hahc21 14:53, 19 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Remix

edit
  • First paragraph is too long. Consider splitting.
    The bit about Nicki, Demi, Katy etc. was actually WP:OR, I don't know who added this. But I've removed it.

General comments

edit
  • With the actual length of the article, the lead should be longer to properly cover all the article body.
    The first lead covers the interlude, and says Brown is on the remix. The second lead covers the remix. Aaron You Da One 11:30, 20 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hahc21 14:59, 19 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

More comments
  • When you split the article, you added a cover to the remix. What happened? That cover wasn't official?
    Can't have been. Looked it though. Aaron You Da One
  • Made some fixes on 'Chart performance' of the remix:
  • "tonumber" >> "to number";
  • "Airplay Honor gainer" >> "Airplay Gainer honor again"
  • The 'other remixes' section is too short. Why don't you consider merging it with another one?
      Done Aaron You Da One
  • Also, the first paragraph of 'Development' seems to fit better on Background, since it's specs about Aguilera and tweets, mainly.
    Hmm okay. Aaron You Da One

Hahc21 15:34, 20 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

  • Okay. Everything has bee addressed.

Verdict

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):  

Overall:
Pass/Fail:  

  ·   ·   ·  

Hahc21 16:36, 20 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks Aaron You Da One
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.