Talk:Work (Ciara song)/GA2

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk · contribs) 02:00, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: One found and fixed.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 02:05, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Linkrot: None found. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:06, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

   Originally, Fantasy Ride was announced to be divided into three different discs, each representing a particular sound. Ungrammatical, rewrite in good plain English.

   The song and "High Price" were at one point in contention of serving as the album's lead single Ungrammatical.

   The song's hook consists of repeated shouty remarks to "Work! Work!" "shouty"?

   Overuse of "The song" as the start of sentences.

   Sarah Rodman of The Boston Globe named the song the album's most essential and praised Elliott as the best guest artist "most essential"

   '' Andy Kellman of Allmusic was negative on the song, rewrite in good plain English.

   On the issue dated July 11, 2009, "Work" entered the UK Singles Chart at number 71. "On"?

   In its third week, it rose four placements to acquire a peak of number 52 "placements"?

   '' Ciara then signals her dancers to a sand dune in front of the site, for a group choreography, all wearing white tops, torn blue jeans, ????

   This is not reasonably good prose, please find someone who can write good plain English to copy-edit throughout.

   Complies sufficiently with MoS

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   Adequately sourced, RS, no evidence of OR

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Reasonable coverage for a minor hit.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   NPOV

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):

   Images captioned and FUR provided. Audio clip is <10% and FUR provided.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On hold for seven days for a thorough copy-edit. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:34, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

   OK, I guess this passes muster now. Listing as GA. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:02, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

I have put a request at WP:GOCE. Pancake (talk) 13:43, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

The article has been copy edited. Pancake (talk) 14:21, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.