Contents

Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Hayley Westenra/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Hayley Westenra

From this peer review I am hoping to get this article up to the level of GA. Many of the concerns have been addressed since the last review and application for GA. I am looking for more input on what needs to be added. Much of the information which was requested in the article's application for GA status and is not in the article is hard to come by. More direction from external people not associated with the creation of page is appecerated. Andrew D White 00:30, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

The old review can be found here. --Woodym555 20:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Avoid using contractions like (outside of quotations): Can't.
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:11, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I can see that it was an automatic review since the first issue found is not applicable to the current revision. I believe that GFDL images qualify as free. Andrew D White 19:42, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, the automated reviewer doesn't seem to recognise images within infoboxes. It's one of its flaws. DrKiernan 07:44, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Added Persondata. The "Can't" contraction in the article is the name of one of the sourced documents and is not used in the document. I have copyedited myself but as you should be able to tell I am not the best at noticing my own spelling errors although other editors have also made copyedits to the article as well. Andrew D White 19:56, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• The fact that "persondata" is the only thing picked up by the automated process is indicative that the article is of a high standard, which also appears to be the case giving it a quick personal glance. Should easily meet GA. DrKiernan 07:44, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page.