GA Review
editI am going to have to fail this article's GA nomination, due mainly to referencing issues, but also to myriad other MOS issues. Here is a list of some of the issues with the article:
- The presence of two cleanup banners and a fact tag.
- Severe under-referencing. There are multiple sections with no referencing at all.
- There should be no bolding in the article outside of the lead.
- External links in the body of the article should either be converted to references or moved to the External links section at the end of the article.
- Web references need publishers and access dates.
- Images should be staggered right and left, but text should not be sandwiched between two images.
- The number of lists (areas using bullet points) should be minimized per MOS.
- The lead should be a summary of the entire article and include no new information, therefore, it should have no references in it.
- Short paragraphs (those of one or two sentences) should be expanded or combined with other paragraphs.
These are the main issues I saw in a quick run through the article that should be addressed before the article is renominated for GA status. Please note that I have not done a complete check of grammar and prose, and so this is not an exhaustive list of things that must be done, and simply completing the list above will not assure the article of GA status. If you have any questions, please drop me a note on my talk page. Dana boomer (talk) 19:53, 11 September 2008 (UTC)