Talk:Jacen Tan
Appearance
![]() | Jacen Tan was a Media and drama good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
your sources . |
GA Review
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Jacen Tan/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
I shall be reviewing this page against the
Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:25, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
]
Quick fail criteria assessment
- The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
- The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
- There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.
- The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
- The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
No problems found when checking against quick fail criteria, on to substantive review. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Checking against GA criteria
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
- The article is reasonably well written
- b (MoS):
- Would suggest a suitable infobox is added, and that the background section be expanded to give some account of his life. A section of reception / criticism of his films would be good as well. Any reliable sources in the additional sources section should eb converted to inline citations tied to the statements they support;
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
- ref #12 [1] is a dead link; includes cameos by prominent Singapore film-makers such as Juan Foo, Tan Pin Pin, Sun Koh, Kristin Saw and Lionel Chok. only two of these are supported by ref #3 [2]; ref #6 [3] supports the fact that the film won 2nd place in the Digital Short Film - Open Category, not overall at the fiesta ss implied; ref #10 [4] is OK, but makes no connection with the film; neither does ref #15 [5] which as a press release is a WP:primary source.
- ref #12 [1] is a dead link; includes cameos by prominent Singapore film-makers such as Juan Foo, Tan Pin Pin, Sun Koh, Kristin Saw and Lionel Chok. only two of these are supported by ref #3 [2]; ref #6 [3] supports the fact that the film won 2nd place in the Digital Short Film - Open Category, not overall at the fiesta ss implied; ref #10 [4] is OK, but makes no connection with the film; neither does ref #15 [5] which as a press release is a
- b (citations to reliable sources):
- c (OR):
- The connection made between Tan's film and the availability of sports pitches appears to be original research
- The connection made between Tan's film and the availability of sports pitches appears to be
- a (references):
- It is broad in its scope.
- a (major aspects):
- No details about birth, upbringing, eduction - the sort of details that should be included in a biography.
- b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of viewpolicy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Insufficient content to determine
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Not applicable no images used.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Overall, this article is a long way away from good article standards so I will not be listing it at this time. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
nobots
|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110722124645/http://www.sinema.sg/2007/03/09/screening-jacen-tans-films-seletar-airbase-sinema-at-timbre/ to http://www.sinema.sg/2007/03/09/screening-jacen-tans-films-seletar-airbase-sinema-at-timbre/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
{{source check
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—
Talk to my owner:Online 22:48, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
]