Talk:MrBeast/GA1

GA Review

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.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: TrademarkedTWOrantula (talk · contribs) 07:11, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Mister Beast 6000..." TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 07:11, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I think I'm going to have to fail this review. The nominator isn't active; they haven't been on Wikipedia since January 16. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 01:07, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Honestly kind of surprised. There have been no recent edit wars.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Important issues

There's some WP:PROSELINE in the "Investments and partnerships" and "Personal life" sections.

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.

Closing

For the record, I wanted to close this review. However, as Skyshifter noted on my talk page, I completely forgot to ping the reviewer, @Endof. I have no idea what to do next. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 05:38, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: I had zero motivation to work on this article, so I just assumed the nominator wasn't going to do anything. This led me to close the review. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 03:08, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]