Talk:Disco Kid

Disco Kid was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (July 7, 2011). There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Video games

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Purple Francis (7 participants)
Gilman Louie (2 participants)
Yoshimitsu (3 participants)
Dr. Wily (8 participants)
First Internet Backgammon Server (3 participants)
Emote (2 participants)
Preston Arsement (6 participants; relisted)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Kid Quick connection

This is the most I could find. May not pass WP:RS, but it's the first thing I found on Google.

Yeah, I was hoping hg101 would work, but it doesn't seem like it passes RS. At least, the author does not. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 20:05, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Disco Kid/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 11:58, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct? Done

2. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation? Not done - Doesn't address the words to watch, possibly slightly bias.

3. It provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout? Not done - Not every claim is supported by a source.

4. It provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines? Not done - Some citations, but more need to be added.

5. It contains no original research? Done - Possibly, but if so, not much.

6. It addresses the main aspects of the topic? Done - Yes.

7. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail? Not done - Possibly too many reviews.

8. It represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each? Not done Repetition of same points. Not supported by sources and possibly racist.

9. It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute? Not done - Some disputes in the history of the page.

10. Illustrated, if possible, by images: Done - Yes, but only one. Quite a short article so I'll let it go.

(a) Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content? Not done - Dispute on image.

(b) Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions? Done -

The article does no cover the topic in enough detail, please expand the article so it adequately covers the topic and then re nominate it. Thank you. Pass or fail? Not done - Fail unfortunately, fails too much of the criteria.