Talk:Echoes (Pink Floyd song)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wasted Time R (talk) 13:03, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

---

This article has many shortcomings.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   There are numerous MoS violations. Footnotes go immediately after a period, not before and not after with an intervening space. Use "second" not "2nd". Several album and DVD names need to be italicised, and the song title itself always needs to be in double quotes, not italics or unquoted as it sometimes is. The formatting of citations is mostly very poor – bare references or titles, no publisher, date, access date, author, etc. See any FA or solid GA article for what these should look like. The lead section does not summarize the article well and contains too much minor detail about song length comparisons.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   The sources used in this article are of generally poor quality – fan pages, faq pages, deadlink blogs. There have been many books published about the group – see Pink Floyd#References for a list of them – and surely many of them have written something about "Echoes". Moreover, much of the article is uncited at all. Especially since the talk page and article edit summaries reveal past disagreements about some of the recording details, considerably better sourcing and citing is necessary for GA status.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   There should be a section that deals with the critical reception to "Echoes". Is this considered one of the group's best works ever? If so, by whom? If not, why not? And where does "Echoes" fit within the overall development of Pink Floyd's music and art?

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Unfortunately, this article is not close to being ready for GA status.