Talk:Black Lab/GA1

GA Reassessment

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

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:36, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose):

   b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references):

   • Four dead links found using this tool, also several redirects. Ref #5 [1] returns a blank page; Jezhotwells (talk) 20:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)  Done

The AMG and PMC Top10 cites should be fixed. The San Jose Mercury-News article has been moved to a pay archive - here it is in a search: http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=SJ&p_theme=sj&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&s_dispstring=allfields(podcasters%20aim%20to%20push%20song)%20AND%20date(1/1/2007%20to%201/1/2008)&p_field_date-0=YMD_date&p_params_date-0=date:B,E&p_text_date-0=1/1/2007%20to%201/1/2008)&p_field_advanced-0=&p_text_advanced-0=("podcasters%20aim%20to%20push%20song")&xcal_numdocs=20&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&xcal_useweights=no. (for some reason I can't get the link to display on its own.) How do you prefer that this be linked? Or should I just delink it and treat it like a non-online resource? Chubbles (talk) 15:34, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

1. • I have linked it to Nexis, which I guess is like Newsbank. If you look at the cite it preserves the original url, but diplays the archive. All OK now. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:04, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

   b (citations to reliable sources):

   • References that could be check OK> Jezhotwells (talk) 20:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

   c (OR):

2. It is broad in its scope.

   a (major aspects):

   b (focused):

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

5. 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):

6. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   • On hold for referencing to be sorted out. Major contributors and project will be informed. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:51, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

   All OK now, i am happy to confirm this artcile's status as a Good Article. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:04, 24 July 2009 (UTC)