Talk:Beatle Country/GA1

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Zmbro in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Zmbro (talk · contribs) 12:57, 26 August 2021 (UTC)Reply


Grabbing this. – zmbro (talk) 12:57, 26 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose ( ) 1b. MoS ( ) 2a. ref layout ( ) 2b. cites WP:RS ( ) 2c. no WP:OR ( ) 2d. no WP:CV ( )
3a. broadness ( ) 3b. focus ( ) 4. neutral ( ) 5. stable ( ) 6a. free or tagged images ( ) 6b. pics relevant ( )
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked   are unassessed

Infobox and lead

edit
  • Infobox looks good
  • "Following the record company's success" → "Following the label's success" keep it simple
  • Fixed.
  • "needed to be "countrified", "flattening"[1]" feels like a word is missing; maybe "thereby 'flattening'"?
  • Altered it a little bit. Let me know if it's alright.

Background

edit
  • "an album of the group" → "an album for the group"
  • Done.
  • "5600-person" shouldn't it be "5,600-person"?
  • Done.

Recording

edit
  • Link Dylan
  • Done.

Songs

edit
  • Looks good

Release and reception

edit
  • 2225 → 2,225
  • Done.
  • Change "record company" to "label" for simplicity's sake
  • Done.
  • Beatlemania should be linked a sentence before
  • Fixed.
  • characterises → characterizes
  • Fixed.

Legacy

edit
  • Looks good

Track listing

edit
  • Why does the table not take up the full screen?
  • Personal preference, I guess. I saw JG did it over a A Collection of Beatles Oldies and liked the look, but it doesn't really matter to me. I brought it back to its full width.

Personnel

edit
  • Looks good

Charts

edit
  • Since it's just one item you can remove the "weekly" sub-section
  • Done.

Notes/References/Sources

edit
  • I would use an actual cite web template for AllMusic rather than the AllMusic specific one – I find that one to be outdated. That way you can also add an archive link
  • Done.
  • Missing access date and archive on ref 48
  • You don't need to have page numbers in the sources section – that's what the sfn's are for
  • The ones with page numbers are for chapters in books with multiple authors, indicating the page range of that particular chapter, then the specific page appears in the sfn.

Final thoughts

edit
  • Overall this was a very interesting read. I literally had no idea this existed nor anything like it did, and the fact that there was enough info here to warrant an article of this quality is very impressive to me. I really say congrats to you; you've been impressing me with all your Beatles-related articles so far and this is no exception. Well done. Just a few queries and this will be an easy pass. – zmbro (talk) 16:01, 27 August 2021 (UTC)Reply