Talk:Get Your Gunn

Fair use rationale for Image:Marilyn Manson - Get Your Gunn.jpg

Image:Marilyn Manson - Get Your Gunn.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

CITATIONS NEEDED

There is some fantastic trivia and information on this page --- too bad there isn't any support for where it came from. Please help out and get these facts attributed. Greenshinobi (talk) 20:42, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Get Your Gunn/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Homeostasis07 (talk · contribs) 23:43, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi @MagicatthemovieS: Sorry for the delay. I got halfway through reviewing this last night but, ya know, "*hit" happens. ;)

Anyway, there were a couple – mostly minor – issues with this one, but you probably seen me rectifying these myself. MOS says to put Personnel before Charts: [1]; there was one single inaccuracy on the article: [2]; a SCREAMING issue: [3]; and I added a full list of credits from the single artwork: [4]. Another thing that had me stumped for a minute was the In popular culture section. I thought those things were to be avoided, but it looks like things have changed quite a bit since the last time I paid attention, so no problem with this from me.

Other than these, this was an interesting and engaging article to review. No issues with source quality, all images are public domain (except the sound file, which has a FUR), the text is well-written, reliably sourced, and EarWig's copyvio tool showed no plagiarism (except for this song's MansonWiki page—although that was mostly due to repetition of certain song titles on both articles).

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

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.:

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:

No point in hanging around. Passing. Well done, again, Magic. Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:09, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Sources

• The 10 Best Marilyn Manson SongsWayback

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• R. Budd Dwyer.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:52, 1 June 2020 (UTC)