Talk:Showgirl: Homecoming Live/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Grnrchst (talk · contribs) 08:41, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

Lead

• "singer and songwriter" Could be contracted to singer-songwriter

 Done

• Was it also released internationally by Parlophone? Or did Parlophone only release it in the UK?

 Done added EMI which released it internationally

Background

• Frontier Touring Company is cited a couple times in this section. As this company is non-independent source, it would be ideal if you could find alternative sources for the information it's cited to.

 Done replaced

• Remove the Amazon sales page for the album. The information it's cited to is already sourced from a more clearly reliable source, so there's no need.

 Done removed

Reception

• MSN Music should be in italics.

 Done

Commercial performance

• No notes

Track listing

• No notes

Personnel

• Maybe provide a link to liner notes for clarity.

 Done

Charts

• Think this section and the "Commercial performance" section could be merged, as they're depicting more or less the same thing in different forms.

Mmm I think it's better the way it is now, is that OK? Alex ^{reach me!} 00:15, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Aye looks good! --Grnrchst (talk) 07:51, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Certifications

• No notes

Release history

• Table formatting has an error, so there's no bottom line for the "Format", "Label" and "Ref" columns. This needs fixing.

What do you mean? Alex ^{reach me!} 00:15, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

It was a problem with the row span being set too long. I've fixed it now, see the diff.[1] --Grnrchst (talk) 07:49, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Checklist

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

   All very well written, with no clear spelling or grammatical mistakes.

   b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

   References should be gone over in order to make sure they're fully cited, not missing dates of publication, authors, etc.

   b. (citations to reliable sources):

   There's a couple instances of non-independent sources, from the touring company and a sales page for the album, in the Background section.

   c. (OR):

   Spotchecked most of the direct quotes and they're all verified.

   d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

   Earwig only flags the direct and attributed quotes.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a. (major aspects):

   Perhaps it could do with a bit more about the concert itself.

   b. (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Last revert was in 2007.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

   Album cover is fair use, photo of the concert is licensed under CC 4.0.

   b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Alt text aught to be provided for the images.

7. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

   Holding for now, as a couple of the sources in the Background section are bugging me. Aside from that, this is a very well put-together article that I think could quite easily be passed.

   I have addressed most of the issues, see above. Alex ^{reach me!} 00:15, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

   Thank you very much! Looks all good now, excellent work! :) --Grnrchst (talk) 07:52, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

(Criteria marked are unassessed)