Talk:Usher (musician)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I am currently reviewing this article. JayJ47 (talk) 03:37, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well-written?

(a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct; and (b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.

Review for this point: This article is well-written and well-organised. The prose is clear and I have found no gramatical errors. The article does comply with the manual of style guidelines.

Factually accurate and verifiable?

(a) it provides references to all sources of information, and at minimum contains a section dedicated to the attribution of those sources in accordance with the guide to layout;[2] (b) at minimum, it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons;[2] and (c) it contains no original research.

Review for this point: The article is well-sourced, and therefore factually accurate and contains no original research.

Broad in its coverage: (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Review for this point: The article is focused on the singer/entertainer and doesn't go into any unecessary detail.

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.

Review for this point: The article is neutral and represents view points fairly and is therefore not biased.

Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Illustrated, if possible, by images: (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Review for this point: The article does include images, but both images have been released under free licenses and thus no non-free content is used in the article. The article is stable as no edit wars and/or content disputes have occurred in previous days, and the article hasn't been protected either presently or in the past few days.

Pass or Fail?

I believe that the article meets the good article criteria and thus am passing it. Congratulations and well down to all the editors who contributed to making the article a Good Article. JayJ47 (talk) 06:00, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]