Talk:Playlist: The Very Best of Destiny's Child

Playlist: The Very Best of Destiny's Child 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.
Review: November 12, 2014. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Playlist: The Very Best of Destiny's Child 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

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

Beyoncé Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Beyoncé, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Beyoncé 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.BeyoncéWikipedia:WikiProject BeyoncéTemplate:WikiProject BeyoncéBeyoncé articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

R&B and Soul Music Low‑importance

	R&B and Soul Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles 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.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Music

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in 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.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Playlist: The Very Best of Destiny's Child/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cirt (talk · contribs) 16:53, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this article. — Cirt (talk) 16:53, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

File:Destiny's Child - Playlist.jpg = one image used, fair use asserted, appropriate fair use rationale on image page, no issues here.

Next, on to stability review. — Cirt (talk) 00:27, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stability review

Article edit history upon inspection shows no major conflict going back several months.
Talk page is same.

Next, on to rest of review. — Cirt (talk) 01:20, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Expand lede sect

@My love is love:Perhaps you could please expand the lede sect bit more, maybe with a sentence or two more from the Background and release sect and a sentence with some specific reviews from the Reception sect? — Cirt (talk) 16:36, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Cirt: Can you check the newly added text? I Am... ***D.D. 21:32, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@My love is love:Perhaps you could add a couple more sentences and break the lede into two paragraphs? — Cirt (talk) 21:37, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Cirt: Adding more details would be unnecessary in my opinion as the lead is meant to summarize the most important parts only. However, I can divide it into two paragraphs as it is now. I Am... ***D.D. 21:42, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sounds good, keep me posted. — Cirt (talk) 21:43, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done @Cirt: I Am... ***D.D. 21:53, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alright will revisit soon thanks. — Cirt (talk) 21:56, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA passed

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Writing is of good quality throughout.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Had one minor issue with lead sect which was successfully addressed, above.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Duly cited throughout, however I'd encourage adding "archiveurl" and "archivedate" parameters to all cites to add durability to cites.
	2b. 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).	Good use of in-line citations.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Reliant primarily upon secondary sources.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Covers multiple major aspects of subject matter.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Article is indeed focused in scope of the topic.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	No concerns here, written in a neutral tone throughout.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Stability review above was fine.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Image review above checked out okay.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	See image review above.
	7. Overall assessment.	Great job overall, nice GA. — Cirt (talk) 02:28, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]