Talk:Melly Goeslaw/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk · contribs) 20:46, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:48, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * In the first Indonesian Film Festival after a twelve year hiatus, which covered Indonesian movies from 2000 to 2004,  This makes no sense at all.
 * After refusing to perform solo concerts many times because of creative differences, in 2009, Goeslaw held her first concert,  Confusing, needs clarification
 * Her songwriting work has led to her being recognized as an intellectual property rights figure. What is this supposed to mean?
 * I made a number of copy-edits, please ensure that you get a competent copy-editor to assist you before further nominations.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Spotchecks on sources OK, sources support statements, no OR, sources are RS
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Good summary coverage
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * NPOV
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * Stable
 * 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):
 * No images used
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * On hold until 2 January for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:48, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, all in order, listing as GA. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:46, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Only three prose issues? Not bad. I'll get right on it. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:13, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I've done the fixes, and have fixed a couple of mistakes / typos introduced with your copyedit. A couple questions:
 * I'm not a big fan of 'Whilst' (to be honest, it sounds rather old-fashioned). Any particular reason to replace 'while' with 'whilst'?
 * The source says 'popular', not 'successful'. There is a small difference between the two; for example, we could say that William Hung was successful, but his popularity would be up to debate as many of his "fans" liked him ironically.
 * I had deliberately left 'conventional' in double quotation marks as what is conventional in one culture / era will be completely different in another. Any particular reason for dropping the double quotation marks?
 * Feedback would be appreciated. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:24, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, I accept your points, Whilst/While is a British/American difference. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:46, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Feedback would be appreciated. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:24, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, I accept your points, Whilst/While is a British/American difference. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:46, 27 December 2011 (UTC)