Talk:Election Special

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Election Special article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Election Special 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
Date	Process	Result
February 1, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed

Albums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Roots music Low‑importance

	Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Roots music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to roots, folk and traditional folk music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Roots musicWikipedia:WikiProject Roots musicTemplate:WikiProject Roots musicRoots music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

C?

Do you ever rate above "C"? This article wasnt listed by me at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Assessment, and you can rate it up to "B" (Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Assessment#Frequently_asked_questions)

Now where in this article, and Rhythm Killers for that matter, did not fulfill:

A complete infobox, including cover art and most technical details.
A full list of personnel, including technical personnel and guest musicians.
No obvious issues with sourcing, including the use of blatantly improper sources.
No significant issues exist to hamper readability, although it may not rigorously follow WP:MOS.

Dan56 (talk) 17:56, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, I do not rate above "C" because I do not check the sources and whether there are issues with them. It obviously meets "C"-class based on content alone. Assessments are never final and anyone can list something for an assessment if one feels it should have a higher rating, or someone else can just come along and reassess it. Most people don't even care, so I'm glad you take pride in the work you're doing. I'm just going to continue to help assess the 34,000+ remaining unassessed album articles, over 90% of which are either stubs or starts. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:17, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wizardman (talk · contribs) 05:49, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I generally don't tackle music articles, but this has waited for review far too long so I'll do my best. Wizardman 05:49, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Almost forgot about this; here are the issues I found:

"Cooder's 15th album" the lead writes it as fifteenth; keep consistent.
" Its lyrics attribute the conservatives Koch Brothers to the" conservative, though not sure if the word's needed since the context makes it rather clear.
"and followed on August 20 in the United Kingdom and Ireland,[34] and on August 21 in North America and Australia" rm first and

Just a couple minor tweaks; I'll put the article on hold. Wizardman 19:43, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Dan56 (talk) 03:47, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, article now passes. Wizardman 04:01, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]