Talk:Hey Daddy (Daddy's Home)/GA1

Latest comment: 14 years ago by SMasters in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: S Masters (talk) 07:11, 18 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
  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):  
    Album images needs to be 300px or smaller to qualify for fair use.
  7. Overall: The article meets all requirements except for the image size of the album. I will put this on hold until it is fixed.
    Pass/Fail:  

Comment There is the case of unformatted reference, italicization of online sources and no alternate text for the images. Without addressing these issues the article cannot be passed. --Legolas (talk2me) 08:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for fixing the image. Now the references need to be fixed. Please see WP:REF for more information on how references need to be presented. -- S Masters (talk) 09:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
Everything should be fixed now! Candyo32 (talk) 23:16, 24 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
There are still issues with the references. As Legolas2186 pointed out, there are italics where there shouldn't be (retrieved dates), and there are formatting codes like {{ and [[ showing. -- S Masters (talk) 04:40, 25 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
Hopefully, everything is fixed but there is something iffy with #13, other than that I think I got everything else. Candyo32 (talk) 22:28, 25 April 2010 (UTC)Reply


Final summary: Thanks for all the hard work and fixes. I am confident that the article now meets all the requirements for a Good Article, and I am happy to list it. Well done! - S Masters (talk) 10:26, 28 April 2010 (UTC)Reply