Talk:How Do You Solve a Problem like Maria?/GA1

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

I am beginning a GA review of this article. Please feel free to leave any questions, comments and other reviews below. Thanks! Vicenarian (T · C) 16:08, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Pre-GA Questions, Comments and Other Reviews
None before the initial review. Vicenarian (T · C) 15:59, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

GA REVIEW - Pass


Upon a quick review of the article, there are a few issues that need to be addressed before a more detailed review can be done and before the article can be listed:


 * 1) The "Auditions" section needs to be cited.
 * 2) The "Follow-up and international series" needs additional citations.
 * 3) The lead is a bit long. The third paragraph of the lead contains detailed information about the shows influenced that is better left in the "Follow-up" section. I would suggest removing all but the first sentence of the third paragraph and incorporating the information in that sentence into the first paragraph description of the show.
 * 4) The article itself is extremely long. I am not sure the "Live shows" section needs to list every song sung by every contestant during every show. Could the "Finalists" section be merged with the "Live shows" section? Alternatively, I would suggest that if the desire is to keep the "Live shows" section intact, it should be spun off into its own article, similar to how lists of television show episodes are usually given their own articles.

Accordingly, I am placing the article ON HOLD for seven days so these issues can be discussed and addressed; please do so in the section below. Thank you.

Vicenarian (T · C) 15:59, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * After reviewing the revisions made since I placed the article on hold, and considering some of the excellent points raised in response to my criticism, I have decided to pass this article as a good article, as it is, in my view, in compliance with all the good article criteria. Good work! Vicenarian  (T · C) 05:51, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Post-GA Questions, Comments and Other Reviews
In response to the initial review: Thanks, mattbr 21:15, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Added.
 * 2) Please clarify what additional citations you would like to see, as the text mainly summarises the other shows as detailed in their respective articles. The Grease: You're the One that I Want! paragraph is cited.
 * 3) I have shortened the third paragraph of the lead, leaving the main follow-up series, the Eurovision collaboration and a reference to the international versions. I have left these references in as it has lead to a number of series in the UK and abroad and feel this should be included, and I don't think the lead is excessively long otherwise.
 * 4) At approximately 39 kilobytes, I would not describe the article as "extremely long", and Article size does not suggest that an article of approximately this size be split based on size alone. I think the info should be kept as it is relevant to the topic and shows the variety of songs sung by the contestants. As for splitting, I don't think it is required as the info is not that long, it isn't going to grow and become exceptionally long, and the rest of the article without it would not really be classed as long.

In re your response:
 * 1) Thanks. ✅
 * 2) I see what you mean, and I agree. ✅
 * 3) Your revision looks good, tighter without sacrificing much content. ✅
 * 4) "Extremely long" was probably not the best wording. The article's length independent of this section is fine, and passes WP:GA? 3(a). Really, what I'm most concerned about is how the length and format of the "Live shows" section affect the readability of the article. In brief, the section is a long list in the middle of a mainly prose-based article, and it goes into a level of detail beyond the rest of the article - it breaks up the flow. The content itself is fine, but Summary style suggests sectioning articles such that readers who want detail at a deeper level can follow a link to such a page, and that readers who want a summary are not deterred from reading on; it also suggests that at around 30 KB, this sort of question is worth raising. (I am considering WP:GA? 3(b) here.) However, this may just be a stylistic difference of opinion and I'm not sure it's worth failing an otherwise excellent article. Let me know what you think.

Regards, Vicenarian  (T · C) 21:53, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, I see what you mean. I think I would prefer to not split it off, but I don't think there is another way to address your concern. I'll see if I can think of anything. mattbr 22:29, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I suppose it could be moved to end of the article, although it may seem stuck onto the end and in terms of progression, I think it's currently positioned appropriately. I think it would become less readable if converted into prose and wouldn't solve your overly detailed concern. Let me know if you still feel this is an issue. Thanks, mattbr 19:45, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I've reviewed your comments and revisions, and have read through the article carefully, and decided that my concern is merely a stylistic difference of opinion, not something that would cause the article to fail GA review. Accordingly, I have passed the article and will list it as a GA. Good work! Vicenarian  (T · C) 05:53, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, mattbr 18:17, 15 July 2009 (UTC)