Talk:Giveamanakick/GA1

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

Reviewer: maclean (talk) 04:54, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * GA review (see What is a good article?)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 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): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

This a very good article. I only have two items. First, I think the "noise rock" quote in the lead belongs in the "Styles" section, or at least a mentioning of "noise rock" or "punk rock" in that section. Second, did they give no reason for their split? --maclean (talk) 05:42, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusion
 * Thanks. (1) Done. (2) I have no idea or at least not one that has a reliable source. -- can  dle &bull; wicke  21:41, 29 October 2009 (UTC)