Talk:MediaWiki/GA1

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

Reviewer: Arsenikk (talk)  13:14, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Failing article. Feel free to renominate once the referencing and other issues have been resolved. Arsenikk (talk)  13:14, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments:
 * Remember to subst GAN on the talk page when nominating.
 * Image licenses check out fine.
 * The references are a mess. About half the references completely lack formatting. The main problem is of course that the MediaWiki Wiki is not a reliable source and cannot be used for referencing. Since most of the information on the page is from this, I am forced to fail the article, as it is no small task finding alternative sources. Many of the other sources are sound an reliable, perhaps some of them contain additional information. Remember that information that can be credited to individuals or MediaWiki as an "institution" (but not a collective effort) can be used for self-description.
 * Neither of the quotes provide information that is suitable for a quote. For the grading issue, it reads like a promotion. Instead, paraphrase and explain that the software can be used to track the individual efforts of participants. Regarding extensions, again, paraphrase the information instead of quoting it. The language is too informal for an encyclopedia and is lengthly enough that it may be a copyvio.
 * External links should be avoided in-line. Instead, add them under "external links".
 * The overall content and structure of the article seems good, but I will not conduct a word-for-word review of the full article, given that it fails on other grounds. There are the odd MOS issues (none that fall within the GA scope that I could see), but otherwise the prose is well written and flows well.