Talk:Ziana Zain/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: BelovedFreak 22:46, 15 August 2010 (UTC) Unfortunately this article has a long way to go before meeting the GA criteria.
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- 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, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
- There are problems with the manual of style, such as incorrect use of bold text in the lead (only the subject's names should be bold)
- Violations of the Neutral point of view policy, for example: "Ziana emerged as a sensational star", "Her powerful voice and adorable personality"
- Incorrect grammar and punctuation (for example capital letters in the middle of sentences)
- Poor prose throughout (eg. "Ziana emerged as a sensational star after she was discovered by a popular music director, Rahim Othman when the first time he saw her sang with Royal Malaysian Police (PDRM).")
- There are links to disambiguation pages (Avon and RIM)
- There are several dead links (some of which are listed at [1])
- If "prodarktion" is not an official Youtube channel, then the article is probably linking to copyright violations, which is not allowed
- I'm unsure of the reliability of some of the sources used (eg. VanityShack, Celebrity Pujaanku, filemkita.com)
I'm a little concerned that the nominator doesn't appear to have edited the article recently, so I'm not sure how invested they are in improving the article. Anyway, my suggestions are:
- Review the Good Article criteria
- Tone down the overly positive language
- Get a thorough copyedit from a native (or professional standard) English-speaker, preferably one who's not already involved in the article
- Examine the references used to make sure that they all meet WP:RS
- Request a peer review.
Please let me know if you have any questions.--BelovedFreak 22:46, 15 August 2010 (UTC)