Talk:Windows Product Activation/GA1

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

Reviewer: MWOAP (talk) 01:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Closed case, willing to reopen on fix of all issues. --MWOAP (talk) 22:49, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Criteria 1
❌
 * Section one paragraph two needs to be combined with paragraph one and specify after windows installation.
 * This actually isn't a flaw. The product key is required during installation. Activation is a seperate procedure. The only reason why the entering of the product key is mentioned is because activation uses the entered product key to verify authenticity. However, it is not clear, so I will fix this. -- Michael Kourlastalk 22:01, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Section one paragraph seven needs to be combined with paragraph six. They relate to each other.
 * Fixed.-- Michael Kourlastalk 00:03, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Section one last sentence is confusing.
 * Fixed.-- Michael Kourlastalk 00:03, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Section two paragraph two needs to be combined with paragraph one. They relate to each other.
 * Fixed.-- Michael Kourlastalk 00:07, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Typed "A OEM" needs to be "an OEM"
 * Fixed.-- Michael Kourlastalk 00:07, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * It should include a chart of which features apply to certain versions instead of  them all spread out in text.
 * Table/chart added. Text kept because just a chart would look strange. -- Michael Kourlastalk – contribs 20:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Criteria 2
❌
 * Citation one site only covers Vista, this will not be held against the status of GA, but it is recommended new sources are found
 * New sources partially found (cover activation, but not its details) -- Michael Kourlastalk 00:34, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Citation 2b does not source the sentence, this needs to be removed.
 * Rmvd. -- Michael Kourlastalk 00:21, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Citation 4 does not comply with the same data on the site.
 * Really? It seems to me that it does... could you please clarify?-- Michael Kourlastalk 00:21, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, now it is just being used to re verify info that has already been verified. --MWOAP (talk) 01:10, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Citation 9 is a blog, and is not checked by anyone, also, people can contribute freely (limited). This is not verifiable. Find another source or a way to verify.
 * There's another source, so rmvd. -- Michael Kourlastalk 00:21, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Criteria 4
❌
 * I feel that this is too broad of an article. It should contain more information, especially from the Microsoft links in the article. Examples: What is displayed in the corner of the screen if not activated, Activation by modem, include VSM info, and changing the key.
 * Modem info added a while back. Michael Kourlastalk – contribs 20:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Corner info not expressly stated, but reduced functionality/corner notices mentioned. Michael Kourlastalk – contribs 20:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what VSM is... could you please clarify? -- Michael Kourlastalk – contribs 20:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Changing the key... I think the article is more about the process than how to do things like changing the key. -- Michael Kourlastalk – contribs 20:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Criteria 6

 * Caution: There have been major disagreements with this article (not held against GA Status)

Final Call
❌ Failed GA Nomination --MWOAP (talk) 02:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC) I failed this for nomination because this article has a lot more potential, and some sources are not fully reliable. I feel that this could be resubmitted in the future and be accepted. I would be willing to review the article myself again. Feel free to message me on my talk page. I would love to answer questions.