Talk:Bill Oakley/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: -- Cirt (talk) 12:30, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
- I will review this article. -- Cirt (talk) 12:30, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Good article nomination on hold
[edit]This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of October 6, 2010, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?:
- Serious need of copyediting.
- Lots of run-on sentences, and sentences that are too long, and generally way too much overusage of commas, commas where they are not needed and could just be removed, and commas in places where sentences should be broken up into two, or sometimes there, shorter, sentences.
- The comment by East of Borschov (talk · contribs) is correct that the subsection The Simpsons could be broken up with two sub-subsections inside it.
- Personal life - short paragraphs and two-sentence-long-paragraphs - these could be merged and/or better yet, expanded more.
- 2. Factually accurate?: Duly cited throughout.
- 3. Broad in coverage?:
- Early life - this section is a bit short, would be nice to see this expanded.
- Personal life - this section is also a bit small, would be nice to see some additional secondary sources here.
- 4. Neutral point of view?: Neutrally worded and matter-of-fact throughout - though I did do some copyediting removing subtle issues.
- 5. Article stability? No stability issues upon inspection of talk page history and article edit history.
- 6. Images?:
- Two free use images used, with appropriate image pages at Wikimedia Commons.
- Perhaps File:Simpsons writers2.jpg could be incorporated into the article.
Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. -- Cirt (talk) 07:38, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review. There is no other information avaliable so nothing can be expanded. I have no time to copy-edit at any point and a) disagree that there is a problem b) have no idea to try to 'fix' it anyway. Gran2 09:44, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps additional individuals other than yourself can search for more WP:RS secondary sources for info to expand those sects. Copyediting is also something that should be done by someone previously uninvolved with the article. Strongly recommend seeking copyediting help from WP:GOCE and posting to talk pages of relevant WikiProjects for copyediting help - and trying to get some research help from WP:BIOG and WP:DOH. Unfortunately, if none of the above issues are addressed, as stated in the GA Hold statement, the article will not be able to pass. -- Cirt (talk) 17:02, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
- A copyedit was done, so this can be reviewed again. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 04:56, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
- Looks much better, thanks for the notice. GA passed. -- Cirt (talk) 04:58, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
- A copyedit was done, so this can be reviewed again. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 04:56, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
- Perhaps additional individuals other than yourself can search for more WP:RS secondary sources for info to expand those sects. Copyediting is also something that should be done by someone previously uninvolved with the article. Strongly recommend seeking copyediting help from WP:GOCE and posting to talk pages of relevant WikiProjects for copyediting help - and trying to get some research help from WP:BIOG and WP:DOH. Unfortunately, if none of the above issues are addressed, as stated in the GA Hold statement, the article will not be able to pass. -- Cirt (talk) 17:02, 6 October 2010 (UTC)