Talk:Viva el Príncipe

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Viva el Príncipe/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: North8000 (talk · contribs) 11:59, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Review discussion

I am starting the review of this article.North8000 (talk) 11:59, 10 December 2012 (UTC) Thank you for the review, but you could please notify on my talk page next time? GA reviews are not listed on watchlists when they are created. Anyways, here are my responses.

This following is just a thought to take into consideration, probably not a requirement to pass. This listing of 59 people as credits for the album is a bit much . Unusual, a bit too big of a list and too detailed to be useful for the average reader. Is there any way that the list could be summarized, condensed? Possible shortened enough to put in paragraph form? North8000 (talk) 12:13, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

See my article Romances, which is FA.

Resolved. If you've already thought this through and think it should stay how it is, that's cool. North8000 (talk) 03:09, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

The "recording and production" section seem pretty short and spotty. The first two (short) sentences are mostly the only information about the production. After that it just discusses which songs are on it, and what Castro thought about the album. On one extreme there is is a list of 59 involved people in another section, but nothing that any of them did (except for two people) is discussed. Is any more info available? North8000 (talk) 12:38, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Not as far as coverage, goes, but I'll go ahead and include artist as well. I have added both Castro and José at the personnel section.

Also, in that section, Ferrer's absence is mentioned in a sentence about something else as if it had already been said, but there is nothing on it. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 12:32, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure you mean here. If I think I get what you're saying, I had mentioned Ferrer in the background when José suggested his involvement. Are you maybe asking why he was not involved in the production? Erick (talk) 02:33, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Long story short, recommend adding a sentence saying (as minimum) that he was absent, and adding it prior to the sentence that refers to his absence. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 03:09, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I found and added that it was his record label that made the decisions much to Castro's chagrin. I included it after the sentence since it was Castro confirmed their involvement.

This is a very well done article. The issues that I found were small and even if they were not addressed this article would pass. But this does offer an opportunity to note and make a few improvements. Just do whatever you feel comfortable doing short term in those areas and let me know when you are done-for-now, and I'll pass it. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 12:56, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the review. :) Erick (talk) 01:24, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

My pleasure. North8000 (talk) 12:11, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Final checkoff list GA criteria

Well-written

Passes this criteria.North8000 (talk) 22:12, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Factually accurate and verifiable

Passes this criteria. North8000 (talk) 12:33, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Broad in its coverage

Passes this criteria North8000 (talk) 22:12, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each

Passes this criteriaNorth8000 (talk) 12:25, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute

Passes this criteria. Article is stable. North8000 (talk) 12:05, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Illustrated, if possible, by images

Passes this criteria. Has 3 images, the one non-free image has an article-specific use rationale. North8000 (talk) 12:02, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Passed Good Article

I have passed this as a Good Article. Nice work building this excellent article! North8000 (talk) 01:27, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Passed Good Article

I have passed this as a Good Article. Nice work building this excellent article! North8000 (talk) 01:29, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Note: I have "repeated" this in the talk page for when the review is no longer transcluded. North8000 (talk) 01:29, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much! :) Erick (talk) 01:47, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

My pleasure. North8000 (talk) 12:13, 15 December 2012 (UTC)