Talk:Sängerfest/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: North8000 (talk · contribs) 15:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am starting a review of this article. The previous review was dropped in progress. It appears that the best way to handle it is to start a new one as it is listed as not being under review. North8000 (talk) 15:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But I plan to generally utilize or finish the previous review, not start over. North8000 (talk) 17:32, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review discussions

First, regarding the larger amount of North American material, I think that the question was discussed and resolved in the previous partial review. In essence, the article is following what's in reasonably available sources. On top of that, it's quite plausible that festivals defined as being about a particular nationality/culture would occur more in places outside of the country that it is about. Just as in the USA we do not have festivals defined as being about "American music".

Next, my next question is more of an exploration than a critique. As possibly the most active editor in Wikipedia on folk music topics, I have a particular curiosity. The start of the main body of the article starts the type of music, at least at it's roots. The the article pretty quickly moves away from covering the music itself. If Saengerfest (back then / and or now) is substantially about particular types of music, (more specific than the broader "anything that involves singing in German") then that topic seems tantalizingly under-covered in the article. If the opposite is true (that they were and are mainly defined as a cultural event rather than specific types of music) than I would say that my "tantalizingly under-covered" comment doesn't apply. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 14:10, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"tantalizingly under-covered". Well, if by that you mean the sangerfest as a cultural and musical heritage is something vastly under-covered in the English WP, I would agree. In particular, the specifics on the music itself. If someone had the sources and the time, the subject matter is worthy of FA (IMO). However, again, I dealt with on-line English-language sourcing, and no sources available to me at local libraries. Sourcing was rare-as-hen's-teeth you might say. I found it disappointing to find a teaser in that the sangerfest spread to other countries, but zero sourcing for activities anywhere but the early German events and the North American events. As stated in the article, it began as a tradition of German culture. When it hopped to pond to North America, it evolved, fused itself with the new culture, and became a form of civic entertainment. — Maile (talk) 14:37, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. BTW I meant to say tantalizingly under-covered and changed it. Resolved. North8000 (talk) 16:05, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery of images added to the article. FYI — Maile (talk) 21:41, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question for North8000 - It has been suggested on this talk page that the article eventually be moved to the more correct/common spelling of Sängerfest. I think that is probably a good idea. Would you suggest if it would be better to move it now before the GA review is done, or to wait until after the review? Or does it even make a difference? I plan to nominate this for DYK under Sängerfest. — Maile (talk) 22:32, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the review work I did, the large amount of work in the previous review, and the quality of the article, I've already decided that this article is to pass. I've only been delaying it until I get the 15 minutes or so it will take to do all of the homework and leave some thoughts. I'll have it passed by tomorrow. I'd suggest waiting until then just to be safe against complications. North8000 (talk) 22:43, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA criteria final checklist

Well-written

Meets this criteria. North8000 (talk) 13:39, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Factually accurate and verifiable

Meets this criteria. North8000 (talk) 13:28, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Broad in its coverage

Meets this criteria. North8000 (talk) 16:10, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each

Meets this criteria. North8000 (talk)

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute

Meets this criteria North8000 (talk) 13:26, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrated, if possible, by images

Meets this requirement. Has 3 images. No non-free images, so no article-specific use rationales are required. North8000 (talk) 20:20, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(Update) Meets this requirement. Has 9 images. No non-free images, so no article-specific use rationales are required. North8000 (talk) 01:11, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Result

This passes as a Wikipedia Good Article. What a well written, informative article! If I had any advice for future development, it might be to expand on the type and role of it's early music. It looks like you may already have the sources to enable that. As possibly the most active Wikipedia editor on Folk Music, the "music to promote social change" mentioned in te article,, and of what we would now call in English folk music, has many parallels throughout history, and I had a frustrated please tell me more feeling when you just mentioned it without going into it. Ditto for more coverage of the music itself during it's beginnings. And so expansions there might be nice.

Congratulations! Nice work! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 01:20, 12 December 2013 (UTC) Reviewer[reply]