Talk:Built to Spill Plays the Songs of Daniel Johnston/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Tim O'Doherty (talk · contribs) 20:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

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

---

Nominator requested I review one of their GANs after kindly reviewing three of mine, which, now that I have returned from down south, will do. Review will come after I've taken a good look at the article. ChristieBot can be a bit slow, so pinging voorts now. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 20:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

   Looks good, can't really nitpick any of it.

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

   Nothing bad, can't pick out anything wrong. Just had to add a full stop (or, given this article is written in AmE, a "period").

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

   b. (citations to reliable sources):

   I don't know of the general reliability of some of the sources, but AGF; a lot are opinion pieces anyway, and are there to verify the quotations.

   c. (OR):

   No OR.

   d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

   Earwig gives 30.1%, which is a bit high but nothing alarming, given that it's mostly quotes and the name that it's picking up on.

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:

   Good'n'neutral, the reviews are weighed against each other equally.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

   Fair use rationale on the one image looks fine to me.

   b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   No caption, but that's to be expected for articles on albums and songs.

7. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

   Well done to voorts and anybody else who worked on this article. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 20:46, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.