Talk:6ix9ine/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Heartfox (talk · contribs) 03:57, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

(Criteria marked are unassessed)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):
 * b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a. (reference section):
 * b. (citations to reliable sources):
 * c. (OR):
 * d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a. (major aspects):
 * b. (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * This article cites several sources that are unreliable, especially for a BLP (TMZ, New York Post, Mirror etc.). Some references even lack publisher information. As this article is a ways away from meeting WP:V, I am quick-failing the nomination. Consider doing a thorough review of the references section to determine what needs to be improved.
 * a. (major aspects):
 * b. (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * This article cites several sources that are unreliable, especially for a BLP (TMZ, New York Post, Mirror etc.). Some references even lack publisher information. As this article is a ways away from meeting WP:V, I am quick-failing the nomination. Consider doing a thorough review of the references section to determine what needs to be improved.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * This article cites several sources that are unreliable, especially for a BLP (TMZ, New York Post, Mirror etc.). Some references even lack publisher information. As this article is a ways away from meeting WP:V, I am quick-failing the nomination. Consider doing a thorough review of the references section to determine what needs to be improved.
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * This article cites several sources that are unreliable, especially for a BLP (TMZ, New York Post, Mirror etc.). Some references even lack publisher information. As this article is a ways away from meeting WP:V, I am quick-failing the nomination. Consider doing a thorough review of the references section to determine what needs to be improved.
 * Pass/fail:
 * This article cites several sources that are unreliable, especially for a BLP (TMZ, New York Post, Mirror etc.). Some references even lack publisher information. As this article is a ways away from meeting WP:V, I am quick-failing the nomination. Consider doing a thorough review of the references section to determine what needs to be improved.
 * This article cites several sources that are unreliable, especially for a BLP (TMZ, New York Post, Mirror etc.). Some references even lack publisher information. As this article is a ways away from meeting WP:V, I am quick-failing the nomination. Consider doing a thorough review of the references section to determine what needs to be improved.