Talk:The Magnificent (song)/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Commencing GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. ✽ Juniper§ Liege ^(TALK) 18:39, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

• "In 1995, Fleka was a late-night DJ for the subversive independent Serbian radio station B92, where he was a vocal critic of the incumbent Serbian president Slobodan Milošević." - requires a source.

• "At the request of Drummond and Cauty, the duo recorded some phrases spoken down a phone line by Fleka: "This is Radio B92: Serbia calling. Message follows", and "Humans against killing: that sounds like a junkie against dope". In return for the contribution, Drummond and Cauty agreed to visit Serbia and appear on Fleka's radio show." - needs sourcing.

• The "Reaction" subssection should be renamed to "Reception" and substantially expanded. It is too thin at present.

• "Charity and money-burning" subsection looks very fragmented; it needs to be reworked so that it no longer reads in such a fractured way.

• The lead should also be expanded.

• The article also exhibits problems with overlinking - but I will go through and fix those problems. The above problems need to be fixed in order for the article to comply with GA standards. ✽ Juniper§ Liege ^(TALK) 18:48, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Review

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 February 14, 2010, 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. This action has been taken immediately because 1)there has been no content improvements made to this article since February 2009; 2)the wikiproject connected to this article is no longer active. Therefore, there is little likelihood that the serious problems afflicting this article will be addressed within a 7 day period. The article has failed GA criteria per the review set out below:

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose):

   • The prose is of an adequate quality. However, the lead and reaction sections are too short.

   b (MoS):

   • Although not glaring problems, there is some overlinking in the article (WP:OVERLINK) - this, however, has been corrected.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references):

   • Although most material appears to be adequately source, some statements and comments are made that provide no supporting material or sources.

   b (citations to reliable sources):

   • The references that are made, however, are mostly accurate and to suitable sources. Citations are presented in the perper format.

   c (OR):

   • There is a question of original research in this article, given that some statements and claims have no sources.

3. It is broad in its scope.

   a (major aspects):

   • The article generally develops and adequately treats the subject matter. However, the Reaction subsection could do with substantial expansion.

   b (focused):

   • Article remains keyed to subject matter.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy:

   • There are some issues with weasel words. The problem of NPOV is confounded by the lack of referencing to statements and some of the more subjective comments.

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):

   • Images are properly tagged and justified.

   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   • Images are accompanied by contextual captions.

7. Overall:

   Keep/Delist: DELIST ✽ Juniper§ Liege ^(TALK) 21:03, 14 February 2010 (UTC)