Talk:Vangelis/GA1

GA Review

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   One slightly annoying thing is that too many paragraphs begin with the "In/On [year/date]," construction.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   Incomplete citations, few of which reference reliable sources. This is the article's biggest problem and it won't be fixed within a week.

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):

   Thirty seconds is the limit on music samples, the fair use rationale is lacking, and the caption does not back up the standard FUR (i.e. what specifically does it illustrate?).

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   —Zeagler (talk) 01:38, 6 December 2008 (UTC)