Jump to content

Talk:Appears/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: Carbrera (talk · contribs) 02:56, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Hey CaliforniaDreamsFan! Sorry for my long departure in the reviewing process, but I'll likely be doing a few more here and there. Since I'm not longer in the GA Cup, my reviews will just be coming in a bulleted list versus my previous section-by-section style. Here it goes:

  • Remove "units" after "physical sales"
  • "Musically, "Appears" is an dance song. It is written in third person perspective, and is about the third person watching a happy and loving relationship." --> "Musically, "Appears" is an dance song written in third person perspective, and is about the third person watching a happy and loving relationship."
  • "300,000 unit" --> "300,000 units"
  • I think you could connect the bottom two paragraphs in the lead
  • "long-time" --> "longtime"
  • "She stated that the song is about the third person watching a happy and loving relationship. "It's about lovers..." --> "She stated that the song is about the third person watching a happy and loving relationship: "It's about lovers..."
  • ""Appears" was released by Avex Trax on November 10, 1999 as the sixth single from the album, which was also released on the same day. " --> Source?
  • "2005–2006" --> "2005-06"
  • "criticised" --> "criticized"
  • "It lasted three weeks on the top 200, one of Hamasaki's lowest spanning singles in that chart." --> "It lasted three weeks on the top 200, becoming one of Hamasaki's lowest spanning singles in that chart."
  • Add "2000" in parentheses after Super Eurobeat Presents Ayu-ro Mix
  • Don't have to include "in 1999" for the "Recording" process
  • Use two columns for the "Personnel" section please
  • Too many countries in the "Digital download" section on the table; do you think this is necessary if at all?

GA review (see here for criteria)

[edit]
  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):
  • A PD image and/or quote box may help break up the text.
  1. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

On hold to allow for changes. Good luck as always. Carbrera (talk) 03:05, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Carbrera: Hi Cabrera! No its all goods, no need to explain All finished with the adjustments and editing, good luck and regards! CaliforniaDreamsFan (talk · contribs} 01:24, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]