Talk:BLEU

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good articles BLEU (reviewed version) has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do.
If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.

[edit] Good Article Nomination

Good evening (GMT time); I have reviewed this article on 23:21, Sunday April 8, 2007 (UTC) in accordance with the Good Article (GA) criteria. I have concluded that, in my opinion, the article has failed one or more categories and is therefore denied GA status. In order to provide constructive criticism, I have below listed one or more of my reasons for failing the article, beside the relevant criteria title; this should be taken as advice for improvement, rather than a list of reasons for failing.

  1. Well-written: Failed (Primary reason)
"...It does not seriously violate the standards in Wikipedia Manual of style, in particular .. Jargon..."
  1. Factually accurate: Pass
  2. Broad: Pass
  3. Neutrally written: Pass
  4. Stable: Pass
  5. Well-referenced: Pass
  6. Images: Fail
"...has images where possible..."

My condolences to the lead editors - your hard work has been informally recognised; just keep it up, and do not be disheartened!

Feel free to renominate the article when the above improvements have been made, or alternatively seek a GA Review or discuss my decision at my talk page if you believe I have been misguided.

Sincerest regards,
anthonycfc [talk] 06:02, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] oops missing info?

"This is illustrated in the following example from," from where? --Ling.Nut 16:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Well spotted. This example is from Papineni 2002. I've noted this. - Francis Tyers ยท 16:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA/R ended

In accordance with the WP:GA/R over this article, in a 3 to 1 vote, it has been listed as a WP:GA. Review archived in GA/R archive 15. Homestarmy 15:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../b/l/e/Talk%7EBLEU_ac50.html"