Talk:Whaam!/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Status (talk · contribs) 04:11, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead is a bit on the short side. Surely it can be expanded on further?
- How is it now?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:37, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The two are clearly linked --> Bit of a lonely sentence.
- Moved to where it belongs.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:20, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Information --> Description would be a more accurate title.
- Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:15, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see no other issues with the article. It is well written and sourced.

Great. All issues have been resolved. Passing the article! Statυs (talk) 07:41, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

comment

There's way to much copyvio in the footnotes. The author should digest the information and and reword rather than use extensive quotes in footnotes. MathewTownsend (talk) 21:34, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]