Talk:Whaam!/GA1

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

Reviewer: Status (talk · contribs) 04:11, 21 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Lead is a bit on the short side. Surely it can be expanded on further?
 * How is it now?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:37, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The two are clearly linked --> Bit of a lonely sentence.
 * Moved to where it belongs.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:20, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Information --> Description would be a more accurate title.
 * Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:15, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I see no other issues with the article. It is well written and sourced.

There's way to much copyvio in the footnotes. The author should digest the information and and reword rather than use extensive quotes in footnotes. MathewTownsend (talk) 21:34, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Great. All issues have been resolved. Passing the article! Statυs  (talk) 07:41, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
 * comment