Talk:Uptown Funk/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: TenPoundHammer (talk · contribs) 20:27, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
Very well written article. I copy edited a few spots to make sentences flow better. Watch for overlinking and slang; I removed multiple links to Unorthodox Jukebox and changed "nail the guitar take" to a more formal phrasing.
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- There are a lot of Wayback links, but they all seem to be working. Every site referened seems to be reputable and third-party.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Very thorough in its coverage. The song's conception, composition, critical reception, chart history, and cultural impact are all covered extensively and fairly. This happens to be one of my favorite songs, so I was interested in the content and learned quite a bit.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Overall the article is very well written and just need a few little minor tweaks.
- Pass/Fail: