Talk:Awe/GA1
< Talk:Awe
GA Review[edit]
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Zanimum (talk · contribs) 01:27, 20 November 2013 (UTC) Awesome that there's an article on awe. When I first saw it, I was in denial that it would be about awe the emotion, I though it would be something else with the same name.
That said, I'm going to quick fail this.
- everything in the lead should be in the article, and thus, if it's in the article too, there shouldn't be references in the lead
- you haven't taken care of easy things like "disambiguation needed" tags
- some of the references aren't properly formatted, they're just plain jane links
- Dictonary.com isn't just "Dictionary". It's either dictionary.com, or whatever source they cited for the actual info. I see Random House, Collins, and Online Etymology Dictionary cited.
- I'm wondering about whether some of the sites cited qualify as reliable sources, just looking the URLs, as opposed to the content. You'd know better, but just a heads up.
I've not read any of the article, but it looks like it has good bones. It just needs more citations, and better quality citations here and there. -- Zanimum (talk) 01:27, 20 November 2013 (UTC)