Talk:Vangelis/GA1

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


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * One slightly annoying thing is that too many paragraphs begin with the "In/On [year/date]," construction.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Incomplete citations, few of which reference reliable sources. This is the article's biggest problem and it won't be fixed within a week.
 * 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):
 * Thirty seconds is the limit on music samples, the fair use rationale is lacking, and the caption does not back up the standard FUR (i.e. what specifically does it illustrate?).
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * —Zeagler (talk) 01:38, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * —Zeagler (talk) 01:38, 6 December 2008 (UTC)