Talk:Eddy Arnold/GA1

GA Review

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

This article is inadequate for a major artist of this stature, longevity and importance.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   See comments below

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   There have been large-scale reversions and major edit changes within the last two months, involving several editors and IP addresses. The GA nomination itself was challenged, and the nominator may have lost interest in the article

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):

   Would be nice if more images could be found, perhaps in U.S. gov't archives?

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

This article is way too short to comprehensively cover the career of this major musical artist, and pales in comparison to other WP FA and GA articles about musicians. The article never describes Arnold's music in any way; it says that he created the Nashville sound but it never describes what that sound is in any detail or what Arnold did differently from previous artists. The lead says Arnold was a role model, but the article body never explores that. If Arnold was a songwriter, it never describes his writing style. Just the first paragraph of this Allmusic bio tells me much more about the characteristics of Arnold's music than this entire article does. Much of this article reads like an abbreviated annotated discography. Nor is there any description of what his film and television persona was like, just another list of appearances.

The article also makes basic MoS blunders, such as putting songs in italics when they always belong in double quotes. The lead is inadequate, and gets into a digression about comparing his hit numbers with George Jones that belongs in the article body.

Because of these shortcomings, along with the article's unstable edit history, I am failing the GA nomination. Wasted Time R (talk) 14:13, 13 September 2009 (UTC)