Wikipedia:Peer review/OutKast/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Outkast[edit]

This is a quality article that I have helped write, and I am at the point where I don't know exactly what to do to improve this article to GA or FA status. Wikipedia's False Prophet holla at me Improve Me 17:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FP, here is an automated peer review output to get things started. Not all may apply since it is an automated review, but a quick scan shows a few you can work on to improve the article. Although not officially required for GA-status, I would suggest trying to have a cited reference for every paragraph and for the tables (i.e. where did the ablum chart info come from). That will help the GA review and you will have already met requirement 1.(c) for FA status. I would also recommened workingon the prose for the beginning of the history section, it could be written in a more encyclopedic manner IMHO. Good luck!

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

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Roswell native 19:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When I go back and find the citations for the tables, is it acceptable to say "The information presented in the below tables is from (source)"? Wikipedia's False Prophet holla at me Improve Me 19:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would put it by the column header assuming the source is the same for the entire column, e.g. after "USA" and after "UK" in the first table.

Album covers should not be used in the discography section (see Wikipedia:Fair use), and the ones that are being used in the main article space need detailed fair use rationales. The Grammy Award history should not be separated by whether or not they won; rather, it should be one table with an additional column for the result. ShadowHalo 08:20, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]