Talk:Eurovision Song Contest 1957/GA1
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Mike Christie in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 21:14, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:14, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Images are appropriately tagged.
- The O'Connor source is dated 2010 in the bibliography but 2012 in FN 8, which is also preventing the link from footnote to listing from working.
- What makes the following reliable sources?
- andtheconductoris.eu
- diggiloo.net
- retro-media-tv.de
- "her victory marked the first of five Dutch wins in the contest": suggest adding an "as of 2022" date to this, since they might win more.
- "Subsequently, in a change from 1956": do we need "subsequently"? I don't think it adds anything.
-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:20, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Mike Christie: Thanks for picking this up! I've made the adjustments and tweaks as outlined above, and replaced the retro-media-tv.de source with a different, more reliable source. For diggiloo.net and andtheconductoris.eu these websites are generally considered to be reliable for use in WikiProject Eurovision articles for the purpose of verifying song languages and the conductors which led the orchestras for the respective countries. andtheconductoris is also used as a source within Roxburgh for the same information as presented in that book.
- Please let me know if there are any further queries or requests needed to have this article reach GA status. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 14:32, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
- The fixes look fine. For the two sites you want to keep, can you point me at, for example, use of those sites by other reliable sources such as newspapers, that treat them as reliable sources of data? Or do books about the contest mention the sites? Does the official site refer to them at all? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:57, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. As I mentioned above, andtheconductoris.eu is cited in Roxburgh (which is also cited in this article) and in other journals (e.g. here). Diggiloo Thrush also appears to have been used in other published materials and journals as a citation (e.g. here and here, also the link for andtheconductoris above). Sims2aholic8 (talk) 09:06, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
- Those convince me it's treated as reliable in the field; thanks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:08, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. As I mentioned above, andtheconductoris.eu is cited in Roxburgh (which is also cited in this article) and in other journals (e.g. here). Diggiloo Thrush also appears to have been used in other published materials and journals as a citation (e.g. here and here, also the link for andtheconductoris above). Sims2aholic8 (talk) 09:06, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
- The fixes look fine. For the two sites you want to keep, can you point me at, for example, use of those sites by other reliable sources such as newspapers, that treat them as reliable sources of data? Or do books about the contest mention the sites? Does the official site refer to them at all? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:57, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
A couple of spotchecks:
- FN 6 cites "A new voting system was introduced, with ten individuals in each country giving one vote to their favourite song, with no abstentions allowed": verified.
- FN 3 cites "Although the number of households which had access to a television in Europe continued to grow, this edition, as in the case of the 1956 contest, was still mainly accessed by spectators via radio": verified.
Spotchecks look good; passing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:08, 7 September 2022 (UTC)