Talk:Arctic Monkeys/GA1

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

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:51, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * I can try to get to this stuff for you. GARDEN  says no to drama  11:44, 21 July 2009 (UTC)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose):
 * Consider the existing weasel words tag. Please go through the article again and check for clear encyclopaedic writing. The lead should be a concise summary of the whole artcile which it is not at the moment.  Please read WP:Lead section and apply.  Jezhotwells (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC) ✅
 * b (MoS):
 * I think the Awards section could do with a short summmary of the Awards article. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC), but that is not necessarily mean a failure of GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:16, 21 July 2009 (UTC) ✅
 * Added a summary of the awards section - any comments let me know. Nick Ottery (talk) 07:34, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references):
 * There are a number of dead links found using this tool. You may find these at the Internet Archive. Also look at the green redirects, mostly on media sites where the url has changed. It is best to change these to the final URL so that the link is preserved. There are a number of bare URl references which need to be formatted using WP:Citation templates for WP:Consistency. Ref #44 just cite the artcile using the cite news template, no need for alink to photobucket which proves nothing. Ref#31 needs to be properly formatted, see WP:Consistency. references appear to substantiate statemenst. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC) ✅
 * Fixed most of the dead links. All redirects now are direct links.  Fixed the Photobucket ref, is now a cite news ref.  Bare links will still need formatting.   GARDEN  says no to drama  12:53, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * b (citations to reliable sources):
 * REf #48 is a blog, not RS. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC) ✅
 * Replaced with an NME ref.
 * c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its scope.
 * a (major aspects):
 * Although obviously will need constant updates. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * Some vandalism but no evidence of edit warring.
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, some issues which need addressing above. On hold for seven days. Major contributors and projects are being notified. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I think the concerns have been sufficently met. I would still recommend a one sentence summary of the awards in that section. Keep GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:16, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, some issues which need addressing above. On hold for seven days. Major contributors and projects are being notified. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I think the concerns have been sufficently met. I would still recommend a one sentence summary of the awards in that section. Keep GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:16, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, some issues which need addressing above. On hold for seven days. Major contributors and projects are being notified. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, I think the concerns have been sufficently met. I would still recommend a one sentence summary of the awards in that section. Keep GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:16, 21 July 2009 (UTC)