Talk:Stardust (Willie Nelson album)/GA1

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

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 11:12, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Looks nice :)! I remember it stubby, but now... another great article


 * 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):
 * 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:


 * ISBN/ISSN check: The short footnote's 13 and the book reference's date are different
 * Dabsolver check: fixed two dabs
 * Checklinks check: ok
 * Reflinks check: ok
 * Fixed dashes
 * Do you agree with this edit? I think it was reasonable; if you agree with me, then their rating and refs should be removed.


 * On hold I give you time to fix these issues.
 * Pass I changed the date for the Draper Robert short footnotes (1991->1986 as the reference below suggest October 11 1986 as date). Also as a test I found the October 11 Billboard magazine, and looking at the front cover, I think it was the correct magazine and my edit accurate.