Talk:Genesis (2007)/GA1

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

Reviewer: –MuZemike 00:48, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

That orphaned third paragraph should either be removed or incorporated into one of the first two paragraphs.
 * Lead issue
 * That is the normal format as seen from my last PPV, Turning Point (2008). Just not alot of info to place there.-- Will C  06:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Prose issues
 * Robert Roode versus Samoa Joe ... were two featured contests on the event's card. → It doesn't read to well. Could you tweak that so that it makes more sense flow-wise?
 * Re-did that section-- Will C  06:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The third Genesis event was announced in mid-August 2007, as to be taking place on November 11, 2007 at the TNA Impact Zone in Orlando, Florida. → The "as to be taking place" part is wordy; I think some simpler wording can go in there instead to explain that TNA set the date for Genesis in mid-August 2007.
 * Copy-edited it-- Will C  06:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The 2007 Fight for the Right Tournament was held leading up to Genesis. → More of a grammar-related nitpick, but the phrase "leading up to Genesis" is more of an adverb phrase, but it's describing "when" and not the proper "how". Tweak the end of that sentence, clarifying that the bouts of the Fight for the Right Tournament led up to and culminated with the championship bout at Genesis.
 * Tried to fix-- Will C  06:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * ...injuring them in the plot leading to the spot being vacant. → Another grammar mishap. Did the plot lead to the vacancy of the spot (note how I avoided the noun plus '-ing' there), or did the injury do that? Please tweak the sentence so it makes more sense.
 * The injury was fake. A part of the storyline to set up an empty spot and to build up the feud. Tried to make that more clear.-- Will C  06:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * There are a bunch of short, choppy paragraphs in the "Aftermath" section. Is it possible you could combine them into one or two fuller paragraphs?
 * They each talk about a different subject. I've tried enlarging them. I started work on the Turning Point 2007 event, the background to that event doesn't have much build. I've included really all that is relevant.-- Will C  06:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

The only verifiability issue that I have is the very first reference, which is, in which I have to question the reliability. I hate to say it, but there isn't much there at all for proof of fact-checking, reputation, or accuracy there.
 * Verifiability issue
 * It is used only for attendance and for times of matches. Really minor information. It has been deeded reliable enough for that, as it gets its information from dvds, magazines, etc from what I am told. I used it in the FA Lockdown (2008).-- Will C  06:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

On hold pending resolution to the issues mentioned above. –MuZemike 00:48, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Conclusions

Passed. After looking at Featured article candidates/Lockdown (2008), and how Lockdown (2008), I'll be willing to let the one verifiability issue go. Otherwise, everything else looks pretty good. Nice work! –MuZemike 19:27, 27 March 2011 (UTC)