Talk:On a Clear Night

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 03:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:On a Clear Night/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:38, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   This is just me, but this sentence, in the Background and recording section, "This was for the practical reason that Higgins found it easier to write music on the guitar than keyboards while touring", how many pianos did she use?

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   Throughout the article, "No. 1" should be "number 1", as many album articles have them like this. Unless, a new guideline was introduced to have them set-up like that, then it's fine. In the lead you say that On a Clear Night was released on 28 April, but in the Release and promotion section you write that it was released on 29 April. Which release date is it? In the Release and promotion section, "Billboard 200" ---> "Billboard 200".

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   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:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

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

6. 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:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Not that much to do. If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:38, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

• In the MoS here, it says that either "number" or "No." are ok.
• I'm not sure I understand your query about the pianos. I've tweaked the sentence slightly but I'm not sure if I've addressed your concern in any way!
  • Like I said, that was just me. Now that I read it more, I get what you were trying to say.
• Other issues dealt with.--BelovedFreak 17:04, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you to Belovedfreak for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:27, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much! --BelovedFreak 17:52, 26 May 2010 (UTC)