Talk:Hello, Goodbye/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 04:47, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

While this article has a decent start, I'm afraid it doesn't meet the GA criteria right now. Here's a list of things to work on:

No need to list certifications in the infobox, and I couldn't find any for this song in the given source
- Found source.
I'm not sure File:HelloGoodbyeGerman.jpg provides any benefit per WP:NFCC
- Removed.
"wasn't" → "was not" per WP:CONTRACTIONS
- Fixed.
Try to give a more definitive statement than "The song was thought to have originated"
- Rewritten as "The origins of the song can be traced back to..."
I'd merge "composition" with "Recording"
- Merged.
"It also was the Christmas number one in said country for 1967. The single was released on 27 November in the United States, peaking at number one for three weeks and becoming the band's 15th American chart-topper." is unsourced
Every nation this song charted in except for the UK and US is missing from "Release and reception"
There are no reviews included for this song; quite a glaring omission since this is quite a popular Beatles song
"the video was directed by Paul McCartney. It featured the Beatles wearing their Sgt. Pepper uniforms with hula dancers from the Fox Miller Dancers dancing in front of a psychedelic backdrop. The film shows a clean-shaven Lennon without his granny glasses." is also unsourced
No reviews from critics for the promotional video?
The references with HARVref errors need to be fixed. An error-detecting script can be used to find them.
- Fixed.
Is "3 News Nz" reliable?
- I think so: I did a little research on it and found that it was a New Zealand news station.

I really do hope this can be brought up to par someday since it is one of my favorite Beatles songs, but right now it simply isn't ready for promotion. It especially is not broad enough in coverage. Please expand the article thoroughly and fix up references before renominating. Cheers, Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:47, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

SNUGGUMS, as I said on your talk page, I'd like the 7-day on-hold period to work on your complaints: I think that the issues noted here can be fixed in that time. I'll work on the issues now. Beatleswhobeachboys (talk) 19:46, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was more concerned about the amount of missing content than I was work speed, and still stand by that. Too late to place this on hold. It would be better to renominate at this point, but I'd first add more reviews; three isn't very much for such a well-known song. Commercial performance is also needed more nations than just UK and US. Best of luck with the next GAN. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:13, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK - Thanks for your input. Beatleswhobeachboys (talk) 21:03, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Beatleswhobeachboys: I have to say I completely agree with the reviewer here, and I was kinda surprised you'd nominated this article so soon. (What's the rush?!) Even with the additions you've just made, I think there's loads of content that's missing for a GA (as SNUGGUMS has said). Sorry, I don't imagine my opinion's of much interest right now – but I'd be willing to help with the article if you want. I'll start adding some details now … Feel free to tell me to butt out, of course! Cheers, JG66 (talk) 22:41, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JG66! I would be more than happy for some help (particularly on the critical opinion work) and I'd be glad to do a collab on the article. SNUGGUMS, I also want to apologize if I seem confrontational: its a little difficult to determine what a GA article looks like most of them are so different in length and style. I'll try to add some more to the article (although I've used most of the info I could find so far: I guess I'll have to start digging some more!). Beatleswhobeachboys (talk) 23:34, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I probably will keep commenting on the points above as a checklist of sorts in order to keep track of what I still have to do. Beatleswhobeachboys (talk) 23:39, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
BW-BB: As you know, I've added a few things. I've been hovering over the Beatles' 1966–68 period for a while now, so it's not too much of a stretch to get my head around this article! For what it's worth, re GA criteria, I think it pays to ignore the extent and coverage in other GAs (although I appreciate the guidance is helpful). I'd say, focus on each article and ensure that the subject's handled thoroughly each time. That's pretty obvious, I know, but a lot of articles make GA and … Well, it's a bit of a surprise that they do, let's say! In a way, I got some "fluke"/lucky passes early in my time here – at least, I soon considered they were flukes when I started receiving more-demanding reviews at GAN. (And I'm still going back to those early GAs trying to bring them up to scratch …) Anyway, back to this article: It was an A-side by the most famous and accomplished rock/pop group ever, so it does merit a fair bit of discussion regarding the song's context in the band's career, imo. JG66 (talk) 00:50, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation: I've done a little more research and I'll probably be adding some more stuff in the coming few days. Beatleswhobeachboys (talk) 01:47, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]