Talk:Jesus Is King/GA1

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

Reviewer: The Ultimate Boss (talk · contribs) 05:08, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey Kyle Peake, I'll take on this article because I see it's been up for almost 6 months! Because it is a long article, and I am starting school in less than a week. Each section will be about every few hours.
 * Thank you so much for taking on this massive article that I have been waiting so long for, as you are clearly aware of from the above comment! I hope this review goes smoothly and if you are unsure about reviewing album articles, take a look at some of the reviews by other editors this year. --K. Peake 06:38, 14 August 2020 (UTC)


 * 1) Well written:
 * 2) the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct;
 * 3) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
 * 4) Verifiable with no original research:
 * 5) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
 * 6) all in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;
 * 7) it contains no original research; and
 * 8) it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism.
 * 9) Broad in its coverage:
 * 10) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
 * 11) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
 * 12) Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
 * 13) Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
 * 14) Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
 * 15) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
 * 16) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
 * 17) Overall
 * 18)  - Kyle Peake and Nice4What, I have decided to review this today because you two have waited almost 6 months for this article to be reviewed! This article is beyond GA level no doubt! I am going to ✅ this! Amazing job on this article! The Ultimate Boss (talk) 07:04, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Side note: Just review the wikilinks for the names that don't have articles on the "Sample credits". The Ultimate Boss (talk) 07:15, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I am very happy to know that this article has been edited so thoroughly by me and Nice4What, but are you sure there are not any issues since the promotion to GA status seems very quick? Also, I am not too sure about the wikilinks to foreign pages; maybe Nice4What added them, let's see what the user says? --K. Peake 07:54, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Kyle Peake, the lead is a little long. Maybe trim it down to three paragraphs? The Ultimate Boss (talk) 07:56, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for giving some feedback but I do not think that is needed to be done by me, since it does not violate MOS:LEAD by being at the current length. Any other statement(s)? --K. Peake 07:58, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Kyle Peake, no, everything looks good! The Ultimate Boss (talk) 08:02, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That is amazing, thanks a lot and I do understand that this is not WP:BIAS since you have left multiple comments in the past on review pages of my articles that are smaller than this one. Also, I have changed the article history on the talk page to show the nomination process the way that looks best in terms of layout. --K. Peake 08:07, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Kyle Peake, Perfect! Great job on this article! The Ultimate Boss (talk) 08:09, 14 August 2020 (UTC)