Talk:Weezer (Green Album)/GA1

GA Review

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

1. Well written?: I tweak the lead, but other than that, looks good! Good job!

2. Factually accurate?: I am going to be adding some {{citation}} tags that need to be addressed soon.

3. Broad in coverage?: Covers major areas, good subsection organization and good overall article structure.

4. Neutral point of view?: Material presented in neutral manner, yes.

5. Article stability? Stable upon inspection of recent article edit history. No recent issues upon inspection of talk page.

6. Images?: One image used, appropriate fair use rationale given, on image page.

7. Citations: I think it is possible for Luerssen D., John to be wikilinked (e.g. as the reference 5 of the article Forgive Me (Leona Lewis song) and reference 7 of Jesus Freak (song)).

This page looks really good! Just address these small matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far.

Reviewer: Gen. Quon (talk) 22:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Non Reviewer Comments

Not to be rude but this article isnt near GA status yet.

1. Weezer_(2001_album)#Background needs to be rewritten, very choppy and does not follow WP:MOS. You have paragraph structure errors, two sentences is not a paragraph, and generally, there should be max four paragraphs per section. Also, it contains fan facty information.
2. Reception needs expansion. You use "IGN, NME, Pitchfork Media, Rolling Stone and Q magazine but you havnt added their reviews to the reception. Further the reception section is biased, you only added positive comments. Pitchfork and NME both gave negative reviews, why arnt they included?
3. Weezer_(2001_album)#Chart_positions. Charts are to be in alphabetical order, and should be wiki linked to proper charts.
4. Entire article MOS violations.

WP:ORDINAL. Write numbers as five not 5.

1. Reference 71 is a dead link.
2. Article overall contains alot of WP:OR.
3. Release section does not contain proper info, you talk about singles, they should be under a section called "Singles". "The album was finally released on May 15, 2001, debuting overseas at #31 on the UK Top 40[51], and in Canada, the album performed even better, debuting at #2.[52] In two weeks the album had sold 215,000 copies.[53] It was certified platinum on September 13, 2001.[54] As of December 2007, the album has sold 1,600,000 copies" should be under "Chart Performance" not Release.

- (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 05:40, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 05:40, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

I apologize but this article needs alot of work. I am failing this article. For editors looking to get this to GA status please take a look at The Fame, Future Sex Love Sounds, Confessions on a Dance Floor, Hard Candy (Madonna album), Ray of Light, or Like a Virgin. These are true GA's. Thank you. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 05:40, 16 September 2010 (UTC)