Talk:Papers (song)/GA1

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

Reviewer: S Masters (talk) 08:56, 24 April 2010 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 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:

Comments:
 * "Buzz single" is industry jargon and should be explained. Fixed
 * Sean Garrett is mentioned twice in the second paragraph. Fixed, I think. He was mentioned twice because the last paragraph deals mostly with composition but techincally it is still background information, so I didn't split it. However I removed his first name from the second mentioning.
 * This is the sentence I'm referring to (second paragraph): "It was written by Usher, Sean Garrett, Alonzo Mathis, Sean Garrett and Zaytoven, and was produced by the latter two." -- S Masters (talk) 15:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Other than the above, the article has no major issues.


 * Oops, I thought you mean second paragraph of Background. Fixed now! Candyo32 (talk) 23:02, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Summary: Thank you for all the fixes. I am confident that the article now meets all the requirements for a Good Article, and I am happy to list it as such. -- S Masters (talk) 04:28, 25 April 2010 (UTC)