Talk:Guto Puw

GA reviews

Guto Puw SCORES IN KEY AREAS
Legality	A	A	A	A
Neutrality	A	A	A	A
Writing		B	B	B
Sources	A	A	A	A
Citations		B	B	B
06:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

There's no image copyright issues, since there are images in the article ;). No neutrality issues. However the lead WP:LEDE is too short, and the citations sometimes put right before the comma or period - not good. The reference density (number of sources per paragraph) is good, and would be very good if there were many more paragraphs like these. The article may have around a 50% chance of passing.◙◙◙ I M Kmarinas86 U O 2¢ ◙◙◙ 06:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I was reviewing this, so edit conflict. But I've failed its GA nom. Reasons: Lead is to short, NPOV issues ("It is a challenging piece, employing graphic scores and written directions to the players containing notes and motifs to be followed, and the players' creativity is stimulated by words and phrases in the score"), no images. - G1ggy ^Talk/_Contribs 07:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I will return to these points later when I have more time. Three points are made about failure:

1. "Lead is too short" - this can be fixed, and I would have thought would be a "hold" rather than a "fail". Later note:  Done
2. "NPOV" - only one sentence identified, based on the description of the piece used by the source. Can be changed, and will be, to make it clear that this is the reviewer's description, not mine. Again, this could have been a "Hold" not a fail. Later note  Done
3. "no image" - well, as I read the criteria, there is no requirement for a GA to contain an image! "Any images it contains are appropriate to the subject, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status. Non-free images must meet the criteria for fair use images and be labeled accordingly." I have no free image to use; pictures of Guto Puw on the web exist, but would not be usable here as fair use since they are potentially replaceable. I have linked to two images of his scores, which are perhaps as interesting as a photo of what Puw looks like (and Puw's own appearance can be seen at some of the references I use). Again, I'm puzzled as to why this merits a "fail". Later note  Not done Bencherlite 13:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I have now addressed two of these issues, as above, and will ask the reviewer to think again. Bencherlite 16:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Images was not my only failing criteria. However, my interpretation of the GA criteria is that images certainly make for a better article. If, as you say, there are no free images available, then I see no other reasons for it to be failed (I didn't place it on hold before mainly because of the image concern, not realising that it wasn't fixable. Had it been minor NPOV and lead, I probably would have...). So I have added this article to the GA list. - G1ggy ^Talk/_Contribs 21:50, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Guto Puw/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Biography: Seven sentences in this section start with the word He. Best to vary to eliminate this sort of repetition. Y

   Music: Two sentences starting Many of his compositions ... Y

   Lead: Again repetitive phrasing - the lead should fully summarise the whole article, i don't think it quite does this at present.

   Overall, I recommend a thorough copy-edit to improve the prose and make it flow better.

   I would further recommend a separate Awards section to include awards and nominations, and re-organising the Music section, perhaps sub-dividing to make it more readable.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   The references could do with formatting using templates such as {{cite news}} and {{cite web}}

   ref #1 [1] is a dead link; ref #4[2]I note the source names John Metcalf but you have John Metcalfe?; ref #5[3] doesn't say that he is the the Welsh Medium Teaching Fellow for the School of Music; ref #7 [4] is just a search page; ref #8 [5] just returns an empty page; ref #15 [6] failed verification; ref #17 [7] is a dead link; ref #19 is a dead link;

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):

   No images are used, but I recommend searching for an image - not a GA requirement however.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On hold for seven days for these issues to be addressed. Major contributors and projects will be informed.Jezhotwells (talk) 18:12, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

   OK, I think the issues have been fixed now, so I am happy for this artcile to reatin its GA status, thanks for your hard work.

Progress

• Jubileeclipman (talk · contribs) has been addressing the prose, thankfully.
• I've made a start on the deadlinks etc.
• I can't find any free-use images of Puw, having had another look.

More to come, no doubt. Bencherlite^Talk 13:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

Guto Puw

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.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Significant uncited material remains. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:07, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

This 2007 additions suffers from multiple issues, namely missing citations, external links and prose. Spinixster (chat!) 07:22, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

• Comment. The External links in prose is something that is WP:SOFIXIT level, and seem to have been added as a result of some edit-a-thon sponsored by Wikimedia Wales at the National Library of Wales ([8]). So probably good faith, just a janky way of adding a reference but a very easily fixable one by any experienced Wikipedian (although... somewhat lacking oversight... since it looks like the edit-a-thon's moderator didn't correctly instruct the user on how to tag their image uploads, resulting in them getting deleted). SnowFire (talk) 07:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

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.