Good articleRomania in the Eurovision Song Contest 2009 has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 24, 2020Good article nomineeNot listed
October 6, 2020Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

GA Review[edit]

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.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Romania in the Eurovision Song Contest 2009/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Gatoclass (talk · contribs) 03:54, 24 April 2020 (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 fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    Again, have my doubts about the licencing on one or two of these, but I can't find copyright versions in a google search, so I guess they are okay.
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

I do think it's for both my and the reviewer's advantage to fail this nomination. The reviewer is too busy in real life to complete this, which is completely understandable. There may be someone else interested in picking this instead. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 06:40, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

@Cartoon network freak: wouldn't it have made more sense for the reviewer to withdraw from the review instead of failing it? That way the nomination clock remains from before and it doesn't become a new nomination. Grk1011 (talk) 16:22, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Romania in the Eurovision Song Contest 2009/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MWright96 (talk · contribs) 13:15, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Taking up the review for the GAN October 2020 Backlog Drive. MWright96 (talk) 13:15, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  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 (reference section): 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Lead

See my comment on this on your 2008 review! Cartoon network freak (talk) 17:33, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See my comment on this on your 2008 review! Cartoon network freak (talk) 17:33, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
See my comment on this on your 2008 review! Cartoon network freak (talk) 17:33, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Competing entries

Shows

This sadly isn't known. Cartoon network freak (talk) 17:37, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion

At Eurovision

Voting

Tables

References

Am going to put the review on hold to allow the nominator to address or query the above suggestions. MWright96 (talk) 16:25, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MWright96: Thank you so much for your review! I have answered to some of the unsolved comments. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 17:48, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:52, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Categories