Talk:Akhenaten/GA1

GA Reassessment
This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Akhenaten/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article has been reviewed as part of WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed.
 * It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * The "In the arts" section needs to be broken down into prose format so it isn't a long, unencyclopedic list of "popular culture" references.--Jackyd101 (talk) 08:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Those references useing op cit. should be written out in full. If an editor adds a new reference above them then the whole lot gets thrown into confusion.--Jackyd101 (talk) 19:41, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Somewhat bizarrely, this article starts with a discussion of his religious policies and no where in the article is there a proper biography - who was he, when was he born, what was his parentage and back ground, when did he become pharoah, what did he do when he was pharoah and so on. What is present in the article are rather complicated discussions on certain aspects of his reign, which while interesting, well sourced and certainly relevant, do not allow a casual reader a simple insight into who this man was. Even something as simple as a short section chronicling his life would help solve this issue.--Jackyd101 (talk) 08:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * On closer inspection I see the problem more clearly: The lead should be used to provide a summary of his life that is then repeated in the text loweer down in greater detail. At the moment, the lead is being used to give biographical details that are not expanded on or discussed any where else. This is a mistake and the lead should be made the first section (edited and expanded) and a new lead written to properly summarise the article.--Jackyd101 (talk) 08:21, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't want to fail this, but it is a confusing issue and one I would like to see addressed. I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made and issues are being addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Regards, Jackyd101 (talk) 08:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
 * It is stable.
 * It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
 * a (tagged and captioned): b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
 * Overall:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * Having reassesed my own assesment, I have decided to pass this article now, although I would like to see the issues I discuss above addressed in the near future.--Jackyd101 (talk) 08:21, 16 July 2008 (UTC)