stringtranslate.com

Talk:Blackpink

GA Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

This article is well written, provides an overview of the topic, and with suitable sources.

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
    a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  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 non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
This review is transcluded from Talk:Blackpink/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Nkon21 (talk · contribs) 19:33, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator: Nkon21 (talk · contribs) 19:33, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Someone who likes maps (talk · contribs) 06:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Someone who likes maps: this is not a proper GA review 750h+ 07:37, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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 Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Blackpink/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Nkon21 (talk · contribs) 19:33, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Tbhotch (talk · contribs) 19:22, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Upcoming review.


GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality (prose is clear and concise, without exceeding quotations, or spelling and grammar errors):
    Occasional issues
    B. MoS compliance (including, but not limited to: lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists):
    Occasional issues with weasel phrases
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources (including an appropriate reference section):
    Some statements are not present
    B. Citation of available and reliable sources where necessary (including direct quotations):
    C. No original research:
    D. No copyright violations:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
    The article focuses on the group and their history
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
    The article is mainly about the band's accomplishments, but these are written with a neutral tone.
  5. Is it stable?
    edit wars, multiple edits not related to the GAN process, etc. (this excludes blatant vandalism):
  6. Does it contain images (or other media) to illustrate (or support) the topic?
    A. Images (and other media) are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    The images are acceptable and properly tagged. The non-free files are used minimally and with critical commentary
    B. Images (and other media) are provided where possible and are relevant, with suitable captions:
    A couple of files that don't illustrate the sections they appear correctly
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

@Nkon21 and Flabshoe1: sorry for the delay. As soon as I complete John Rudge's review, I'll continue with this one. (CC) Tbhotch 01:00, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lead
2010–2016

@Nkon21 and Flabshoe1: I'll continue either tomorrow or on Thursday. (CC) Tbhotch 04:22, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for starting the review. As per your comments, I have updated the lead to incorporate more sections of the article, and have corrected the grammatical errors listed. Flabshoe1 (talk) 02:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks.
2016–2017

It was described as a "mixed genre of music" → by whom?

2018–2019

I had 2020 already but an edit conflict occurred. So I'll redo it tomorrow. (CC) Tbhotch 03:47, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2020–2021
2022–present
Artistry
Public image
The section discusses Blackpink's fandom power and the light stick represents the group's fandom, so I still feel that the image is appropriate.

 Done up to here. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 13:53, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy
Other ventures
Awards and achievements
Done up to here.
Members
Filmography

@Nkon21 and Flabshoe1: I'll continue with the references tomorrow. (CC) Tbhotch 04:35, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References
  • The same with "Le Gala des Pièces Jaunes charity event organized by the first lady of France, Brigitte Macron" [1].

@Nkon21 and Flabshoe1: I'll pause at the moment. I should complete the review tomorrow. If you have any comments or questions, ping me back. (CC) Tbhotch 07:08, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per source, BLACKPINK: A VR Encore premieres in VR on Tuesday, Dec. 26

Addressed up to here. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 02:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's the full review. Thank you for your time and for working on it in the meantime. Once you complete the concerns, let me know. If you have any comments or questions, ping me back. (CC) Tbhotch 20:41, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the detailed notes, and I've gone through and addressed all remaining points. For the Earwig report of similarity to the Billboard link, I've reduced it by over a percentage with some paraphrasing but have been unclear as to how to do so further as the detected parts are fairly generic phrases such as "the first K-pop girl group". Let me know if you have any suggestions. Flabshoe1 (talk) 03:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, common and generic phrases are read as a match by the tool, but the reported percentages have decreased. (CC) Tbhotch 06:35, 6 July 2024 (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.