Talk:Greece in the Eurovision Song Contest 2006/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Well done.
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- I noticed that dates in the references are linked and it would be best if they were unliked, per here. In the National final section, are the links suppose to be like that? Meaning ---> "ESCToday". In the Result of national final section chart, "Nikos Karvelas" doesn't need to be linked twice.
- Check. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:05, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
- I noticed that dates in the references are linked and it would be best if they were unliked, per here. In the National final section, are the links suppose to be like that? Meaning ---> "ESCToday". In the Result of national final section chart, "Nikos Karvelas" doesn't need to be linked twice.
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
- C. It contains no original research:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Not much to do. If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!
- Pass or Fail:
-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 21:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
- I have made the suggested fixes. I did purposely put the links like that for ESCToday and Oikotimes because the websites do not have their own articles. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 21:50, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
- Just needed to know, I was a bit confused the way it was formatted. But, thank you for explaining it. Thank you to Grk for getting the stuff I left at the talkpage, because I have gone off and passed the article to GA status. Congrats. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:05, 22 November 2008 (UTC)