Talk:Britney (song)/GA1

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

Reviewer: SMasters (talk) 01:43, 20 March 2011 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * There are issues with the prose. "It was written by himself and co-written by Jason Ingram for his ninth self-titled studio album, Bebo Norman (2008)." – This sentence can be confusing, Jason has nine album? Norman has nine albums called 'Bebo Norman'? The word "himself" is not good writing in this instance. "...was very well received into the Christian community..." Not ideal language. "‘Britney’ is a... Does not comply to WP:MOS to have song titles in double quote marks. Better to have this is a quote box. "...a popular music website into the Christian community..." "into" a community?
 * ✅ - Sauloviegas (talk) 15:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Article is properly referenced and complies to WP:OR.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * This article is very thin on information. Many song GAs provide a lot more information compared to this. What is the key of the song? How does the song compare to other songs on the album? The song was "well received"; what about the other songs and the album itself? How long did it take to write and record the song?
 * Actually, there isn't any web site that provides the sheet music of the song, since it was not published online. Also, this is all the info you can find online. Anticipating, Unusual You and Shattered Glass, which are all GA's, doesn't have much info either. - Sauloviegas (talk) 15:36, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Article complies to WP:NPOV.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * Article is stable.
 * 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:
 * I am concerned about the quality of the prose and if the article provides a broad enough coverage of the subject; it appears to be very thin on information. I feel that the article requires more expansion if it is to succeed. – SMasters (talk) 02:09, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for making all the necessary changes. I am now confident that the article now meets all the requirements for a GA. – SMasters (talk) 13:45, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for making all the necessary changes. I am now confident that the article now meets all the requirements for a GA. – SMasters (talk) 13:45, 22 March 2011 (UTC)