Talk:Phil Harvey (band manager)/GA2

GA Review

Unsuccessful. FuzzyMagma (talk) 18:30, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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: FuzzyMagma (talk · contribs) 17:54, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this FuzzyMagma (talk) 17:54, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
see comments below
Is it verifiable with no original research?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
half of the references are not acceptable, see details below

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:
did not check due to quick fail

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
excessive use of quotation and additional large pink quotation!
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
did not check due to quick fail

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
did not check due to quick fail
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
did not check due to quick fail
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall: some of the comments from previous review was not address, e.g., "Twitter: The couple have three children" + the article is build on primary sources + there is also excessive use of quotation that does not serve any purpose = quick fail under 1 and 3
Pass or Fail:

Comments

lead

degree at the University of Melbourne during this period

Early life

unnecessary quotes, e.g., the line-up "never overlapped"

Management

excessive quotes that mount to copyvio
"manager again, but now assisted by", remove now

Creative direction

excessive unnecessary quotes that mount to copyvio, e.g., He would "pop his head in the studio to give his opinion" occasionally,

Personal life

"the manager travelled around South America", the manager is Harvey right? then write Harvey

Discography

source?

References

General

excessive use of primary sources, as in interviews (ref 1 and 7), Coldplay Official Website (7 refs) and Coldplay twitter (twice)
ref. 23 and 25 need to be reformatted
Ref. 24 is a form, fails WP:RS
Ref. 25 is a tweet with a screenshot for a primary source, fails RS
Ref 26 is blog, fails RS

Spot checks

Ref 1, failed
Ref 20, failed
Ref 21, failed
Ref 22, failed
Ref 23a, failed
Ref 23b, failed
Ref 23c, failed
Ref 28, failed

External links

Per WP:LINKSTOAVOID, please remove irrelevant external links and templates as described below:

Coldplay Official Website
Coldplay on AllMusic
template "Grammy Award for Record of the Year",

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.