Talk:Natasha Bedingfield/GA1

GA Reassessment

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

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:25, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of July 21, 2009, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR.

I am notifying major contributors and projects. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose):

   • Some statements, e.g. She recently signed on to become the opening act on the recently reunited New Kids On The Block Fall Tour of 2008 in the US. are un-encyclopaedic, now dated, rewrite. Please go through the article with a toothcomb to check for style.

   b (MoS):

   • [1] is not an RS; neither is [[2]; [3] is not Rs and is broken. Other sites redirect to blank pages. Recommend going through every reference, checking and replacing as neccessary. I have left tags as appropriate. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references):

   • Several citations do not support the statements, tags have been placed. Using this tool I found a number of dead links and a number of redirects, which often happens with newspaper articles, it would be good to correct the redirects as the originals URLs may disappear. the dead links need to be replaced. The Internet Archive may be useful for this. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

   b (citations to reliable sources):

   • see above, references to youtube, fansites and blogs are not OK. Her own blog is good for her statements. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

   c (OR):

3. It is broad in its scope.

   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:

   • The refrencing is in a very poor state, dead links, redirects to blank pages, statements that are not verified. I think some time will be required to sort all of this out so I am delisting it, please bring back to WP:GAN when it has been improved. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)