Talk:Love Sex Magic/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 13:46, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:48, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   The article is not well written:

   the lead single in international countries "international countries"? What other kind are there?

   The song sees a complete departure in Ciara's previous style of music "departure in"

   Thus it embraces more of a dance-pop sound, "Thus" is unnecessary here

   as well as Ciara performing choreography with dancers "performing choreography"?

   For its routines it was nominated for ?

   Ciara praised her time with Timberlake "praised her time".

   She also complimented how passionate Timberlake was about his work, as well as his humbleness and attitude. "complimented"?

   This is badly written, should never have been nominated in this state. Please get it copy-edited by someone with a command of good plain English. The WP:Guild of copyeditors may be able to help.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   References appear to be reliable, article is adequately referenced

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Good coverage, but is there nothing about the actual recording sessions? The credits section does not list any musicians?

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:

   This article is not well written and needs copy-editing. There are also points about coverage above. On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:29, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

The copy edit has taken place. Candyo32 00:35, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Really? The specific problems that I noted above remain. I suggest that you find someone who can actually read and write good plain English. The WP:Guild of copyeditors may be able to help. Jezhotwells (talk) 06:09, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

I took your first suggestion and went to the Guild and posted my request, and someone from there was the one who did it. Just so you know, I am an intelligent native English speaker. Candyo32 22:36, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Well, I see that some work has been done, but as I say many of the points i mentioned have not been addressed, so maybe you need to find someone else. I have noted before that not all members of the Guild of copyeditors are actually very good at copy-editing, and sadly this seems to be a nother instance of that.

Another edit has taken place another person. Candyo32 23:03, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, I think that the prose is now improved sufficiently. I made further copy-edits. better luck with finding a copy-editor next time. Listing as a Good Article. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:42, 11 March 2011 (UTC)