Talk:All You Had to Do Was Stay/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Ippantekina (talk · contribs) 05:33, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Dora the Axe-plorer (talk · contribs) 15:54, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
- a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Overall, article is well-written but a few fine-tuning needed. Stays on-topic, no recent edit conflicts and of acceptable length.
- Avoid the awkward repetition of "song" in "Lyrically, the song is a breakup song that samples a panicked Swift shouting the word, "stay", throughout the song," ... eg "breakup anthem", "throughout the song" → "throughout its runtime/duration/length"
- clarify, "including the masters of Swift's albums that the label had released." → "including the masters of Swift's albums released under the label.:
- ce, "could have been mistaken to be sung by" → "could have been mistaken for one sung by"
Sources and verifiability pending. Ping when done.Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 21:04, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Ippantekina, hi, are you going to respond to the comments soon? It's been over a week since my last comment so I'm ready to close if it the nomination doesn't carry forward. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 00:14, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Dora the Axe-plorer: sorry didn't know you finished the review. Could you please place it "on hold" so I'm notified of it? Ippantekina (talk) 11:44, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sure no worries and thanks for getting back Swiftly. Status is "on hold" as requested. Lt me know again once you're done, cheers! Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 12:40, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Dora the Axe-plorer: sorry didn't know you finished the review. Could you please place it "on hold" so I'm notified of it? Ippantekina (talk) 11:44, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Spot checks and sourcing are good to go. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 12:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! I've addressed all your points accordingly :) Ippantekina (talk) 07:47, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Okay that clears it all, I can give this nomination a pass. Thanks! Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 10:25, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! I've addressed all your points accordingly :) Ippantekina (talk) 07:47, 29 July 2024 (UTC)