Talk:Jonathan King/GA2

GA Review

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

Review

Hey, I'll be reviewing this article. — R² 00:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I thought it was fantastic, really informative and interesting and not biased or nasty at all. I had no idea the guy had done so much. I'm a Genesis fan so knew about King but until I was pointed at this on another forum simply wasnt aware of his other work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.41.252.224 (talk) 17:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

• One formal fix the article would definitely benefit from (quite apart from anything to do with the content) would be to sort out the references properly. That doesn't necessarily mean having to use {{cite news}}; but at a minimum at least the author, date, title of the piece, and news organisation should all be given. Jheald (talk) 20:41, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the small print to me. I'll become a contributer after all... Problem: Though I find numerous reliable examples of print citations, as an MOS matter I'm not finding a consistent, reliable guide for formatting all the various <ref>'s we use, esp. for including info from electronic/web media. I do find content suggestions for <ref>'s using web sources, ie., Citation_styles; but what I could use and have never seen is a collection of acceptable boilerplates or templates for a variety of <ref> situations. Hilarleo ^Hey,L.E.O. 18:56, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately I have to quick fail the article because it does not meet the GA criteria.

• It is too short. For someone who has been "notable" since the mid 60's to the present day, I would expect more detail. When expanding the article I would strongly advise that you do not give undue weight to the child relationship stuff, not that I necessarily see a problem right now.
• Once you have built up the article body substantially, I would then turn to writing a lead that complies with WP:LEAD. It will need to be 3/4 bulky paragraphs, which overview the article body.
• Entire paragraphs are unsourced.
• There are some unreliable sources that need changing
  • IMDB
  • Snopes
  • Australian politics.com
  • biogs.com
  • amazon
  • madamearcati
  • Vile pervert.com (a third party source would be better)
  • masterton.co.uk
  • youtube
• Formatting of references is a little odd, take a look at how they are structured at This Is It (Michael Jackson concerts)
• References should come after commas and full stops only. There should be no spaces between the references.

Once this is all done feel free to contact me and I'll happily look at the article again, so you won't have to wait ages at WP:GAN. If you are not happy with the review I have presented you can seek reassessment or resubmit it at GAN. — R² 17:34, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the input.Hilarleo ^Hey,L.E.O. 20:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC)