Talk:Woodstock 50/GA1

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

Reviewer: No Great Shaker (talk · contribs) 13:42, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Basic GA criteria

 * 1) Well written: the prose is clear and concise.
 * 2) Well written: the spelling and grammar are correct.
 * 3) Complies with the MOS guidelines for lead sections.
 * 4) Complies with the MOS guidelines for article structure and layout.
 * 5) Complies with the MOS guidelines for words to watch (e.g., "awesome" and "stunning").
 * 6) Complies with the MOS guidelines for writing about fiction – not applicable.
 * 7) Complies with the MOS guidelines for list incorporation.
 * 8) Complies with the MOS guidelines for use of quotations – not applicable.
 * 9) All statements are verifiable with inline citations provided.
 * 10) All inline citations are from reliable sources, etc.
 * 11) Contains a list of all references in accordance with the layout style guideline.
 * 12) No original research.
 * 13) No copyright violations or plagiarism.
 * 14) Broad in its coverage but within scope and in summary style.
 * 15) Neutral.
 * 16) Stable.
 * 17) Illustrated, if possible.
 * 18) Images are at least fair use and do not breach copyright.

For reviews, I use the above list of criteria as a benchmark and complete the variables as I go along. Hope to provide some feedback soon. No Great Shaker (talk) 13:42, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Comments
, this article is informative and very well written. I think the headline in the Rolling Stone piece (citation #13) says it all about the project: a disaster.

It's a relatively short article (just 2389 words) with a limited scope owing to the cancellation of the event so a single paragraph summary to begin is fine and complies with MOS:LEAD. I made a few small amendments including the removal of four redlinks. If there is a good chance of those turning blue in the near future, assuming the performers are notable, then by all means restore the links. In the overview, I added some more 1969 associations in the same vein as the Grateful Dead one.

This is a very good article and I've no hesitation in promoting it to GA. Well done. No Great Shaker (talk) 14:46, 3 April 2020 (UTC)