GA Review

[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Rp0211 (talk · contribs) 19:30, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't know if you held off reviewing because of my brief block, but I am available to make improvements now. Aaron You Da One 02:07, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't delaying the review because of that; I had some personal things to deal with in real life and I couldn't get to Wikipedia. Rp0211 (talk2me) 04:50, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]


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):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. 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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:


Infobox

[edit]

Lead

[edit]

Background and release

[edit]

Sampling controversy

[edit]

Composition and lyrics

[edit]

Critical reception

[edit]

Promotion

[edit]

Track listings

[edit]

Credits and personnel

[edit]

Charts and certifications

[edit]

Radio and release history

[edit]

References

[edit]


After thoroughly reviewing this article, I have decided to put the article on hold. There are only some minor prose issues that are keeping this article from reaching good article status. I will give you the general seven days to fix these issues and/or address issues you believe do not affect good article status. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Rp0211 (talk2me) 04:50, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have done everything. Aaron You Da One 12:01, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The WP:SAMPLE issue needs to be addressed, even if it is by a tenth of a second; I would recommend making it 23 seconds, so you could get the most out of the music sample while still following the guidelines. As for the awards, I now see it is OK to use this in concerns to good article status, but make sure you fix the table, as it looks like it is not "closed" at the bottom. Rp0211 (talk2me) 17:58, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Does an entirely new sample have to be uploaded? I'm not sure what you mean by the table not having a bottom? Looks like it to me lol. Aaron You Da One 18:04, 22 June 2012 (UTC) Aaron You Da One 18:00, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
For the upload, you can use the same file page, but it will have to be reuploaded so that it follows the guidelines of WP:SAMPLE. As for the other issue, I went ahead and fixed it for you; it was sort of difficult to explain what needed to be done, but you will understand once you see the correction. Rp0211 (talk2me) 20:11, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SAMPLE is a rule of thumb, so one second won't make any difference to US fair use laws (as long as WP:FAIR USE is respected. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 21:33, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Tbhotch. I wasn't aware of the issue that you presented with WP:FAIR USE. Since all issues have been addressed now, I feel confident passing this article. Good job and keep up the good work! Rp0211 (talk2me) 17:30, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]