Talk:Number Ones (video)

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Good articleNumber Ones (video) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 26, 2010Good article nomineeListed

Fair use rationale for Image:Mj-on ones.jpg

edit
 

Image:Mj-on ones.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:Number Ones (video)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Canadian Paul 02:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

I will be reviewing this article right now... just setting up the review page... Canadian Paul 02:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
  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:
    Pass/Fail:  

Some comments:

  1. Reference #9 is dead.
I've made the link into a tree link. Crystal Clear x3 03:26, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
  1. Information that is not present in the body of the article should not be present in the lead. Considering that, what this DVD is isn't actually explained in the body of the article. Even if you copied everything that was in the lead to the body, however, it still wouldn't be enough - this article gives no background to the DVD and fails to put it into the context of his career. Outside of "this is what's on it" and "this is what people thought of it" there's nothing really here. For this reason, I'm going to ask for a second-opinion on this article, preferably from someone who is familiar with this type of article - to assess it on its comprehensiveness.
Would you like me to format the article like this or like this (i.e. like adding a "Background" section)? Crystal Clear x3 03:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
I think that would really help, yes. I'll leave the "second opinion" open for now, just to see what someone else might say, but if the background section quells my worries, then I'll probably just pass it. Canadian Paul 03:39, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
  Done Crystal Clear x3 04:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
  1. Under "Commercial reception", first paragraph - "The DVD album was certified thirteen times platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America for the sales of over one million three hundred thousand units in the United States." - I believe that, per WP:ORDINAL, this would be better written as "1.3 million units" - and so on for the other large figures in the article.
  Done Crystal Clear x3 03:26, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Other than that, it doesn't seem that there are problems with the GA Criteria, so please fix issues #1 and #3 and hopefully a second reviewer will pop up quickly to give their opinion... because right now I feel that it is lacking... I'm not sure... maybe an explanation of the video's notability even? That could be completely wrong, so don't take it to heart, I just think that there is something lacking about comprehensiveness here, and hopefully reviewer #2 will be able to articulate this or tell me that I'm wrong. Canadian Paul 02:54, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Looks much better now. I think that if you add something from the new section to the lead, as the lead must cover all major sections in the article, this should probably be ready for GA status. Canadian Paul 05:39, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
  Done Crystal Clear x3 05:52, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
Oops, just noticed something else: Reference #6 needs a release year and Reference #8 is incomplete - it's only a name and a page reference without the rest of the identifying information. Canadian Paul 05:44, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
  Done Crystal Clear x3 05:54, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well, looks good now so I'll be passing it. Congratulations and thank you for your hard work. Canadian Paul 05:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, Crystal Clear x3 06:04, 26 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Number Ones (video). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:43, 18 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 0 external links on Number Ones (video). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:33, 2 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Number Ones (video). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:46, 31 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Number Ones (video). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)Reply