Talk:Get It Right (Glee cast song)/GA2
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: FeuDeJoie (talk) 19:08, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
--FeuDeJoie (talk) 19:08, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Obviously you saw my review before, (got your message) and looking through it the changes you have made seem to have developed the article correctly. I will be looking through it in more detail tomorrow but the bets are that it is going to become a GA.
Original review
[edit]Prose
[edit]Article is generally well written;
Introduction
- The sentence "who produced the song, with his wife, Nikki Hassman," is there need for repetitive commas - "who produced the song with his wife Nikki Hassman". Edit punctuation Microsoft Word grammar check flagged this as incorrect also. --Done.
Background
- Same problem as above with the second sentence in the section.--Better
- The remainder of the section is very well written and punctuation is excellent.
Composition
- Well written, no obvious problems.
Critical reception
- Voerding, Who is this? You have previously discussed him in the composition section but for a first time reader it seems as if he is a random person as no publisher is listed in this section only in the composition section. It is confusing. Add more detail.
- Other than listed above the section is easy to read, factual and understandable.--Done
Chart performance
- Chart positions need its own section change positions to a separate section: Charts.--Done
- Well written, factual and clear.
Factually accurate?
[edit]- No problems; no outstanding references needed, no original research and all notable.
Coverage
[edit]- Factual, doesn't waffle and everything is relevant.
Neutral
[edit]- Not biased, Critical reception show a good mix of responses.
Stable
[edit]- No edit wars. Stable.
References
[edit]Critical reception
- Reference 5 Seattle Post-Intelligencer, it is repeated twice in one continuous sentence. Why? --Done.
Overall
[edit]All the issues have been met, I will pass this now. Thanks for the changes.
- Thank you for taking the time to conduct a second review. Much appreciated! Frickative 01:09, 11 July 2011 (UTC)