Talk:Culture of the Song dynasty/GA1

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

Commencing GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. ✽ Juniper§ Liege   (TALK)  02:12, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Issues over GA quality regarding this article echo those found in the other articles on the Song dynasty that I have reviewed for the GA Sweeps. Although this article is probably the best written, it also suffers from overlinking and the lead is too short. ✽ Juniper§ Liege   (TALK)  18:23, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose):
 * The body of the article is well written. The layout is properly presented; paragraphs are a good size and well developed, with no single or fractured sentences.
 * b (MoS):
 * Conforms to manual of style. Problems with overlinking have been fixed and reduced.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references):
 * Well referenced. Good variety of sources.
 * b (citations to reliable sources):
 * Citations are to third party publications.
 * c (OR):
 * No evidence of OR.
 * 1) It is broad in its scope.
 * a (major aspects):
 * Addresses major aspect of article subject matter.
 * b (focused):
 * Remains focused. No digressions.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy:
 * No issues concerning POV evident.
 * 1) It is stable:
 * No edit wars etc.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
 * Images are properly tagged and justified.
 * b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * Images are accompanied by contextual captions.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Keep/Delist: KEEP
 * 1) Overall:
 * Keep/Delist: KEEP
 * Keep/Delist: KEEP

I have passed this; BUT the lead is a cause of concern - it is barely adequate for a GA article of this length and needs expansion. ✽ Juniper§ Liege   (TALK)  22:26, 13 February 2010 (UTC)