Legacy

Can someone post a Legacy Header for Kendrick Lamar article JwillWiki454 (talk) 03:10, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2023

Add Kung Fu Kenny to the list of “other names”. 2600:8804:1081:7300:6094:26F1:326D:738E (talk) 01:04, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 01:32, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 September 2023

Change "In accordance to the policy, the streaming platform removed XXXTentacion and R. Kelly's music their editorial and algorithmic playlists due to their publicized acts of violence against women." to "In accordance with the policy, the streaming platform removed XXXTentacion and R. Kelly's music from their editorial and algorithmic playlists due to their publicized acts of violence against women." AyrtonNorris (talk) 18:29, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Tollens (talk) 20:32, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 December 2023

Please change all instances of “Duckworth” to “Lamar” (except when referring to his full name) Eaglefang1 (talk) 04:23, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Duckworth is his legal surname, so that is how he is referred to. Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 06:43, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure about that? Other people get referred to by their pseudonymous surname, and when looking for policy I found at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography#Subsequent use that When a majority of reliable secondary sourcesrefer to persons by a pseudonym, they should be subsequently referred to by their pseudonymous surnames Eaglefang1 (talk) 13:58, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Yes, that policy is correct Dantus21 (talk) 21:18, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This review is transcluded from Talk:Kendrick Lamar/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: 750h+ (talk · contribs) 02:46, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DiaMali, I will be reviewing. I see you're the main contributor of the page, contributing to over 75 per cent of it. I'll be starting soon. 750h+ (talk) 02:46, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

This is a nice article, just some prose concerns just need to be adressed;

References

Comment

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.