Talk:Tupelo Honey/GA1

Latest comment: 13 years ago by Agadant in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: Adabow(complain) 10:12, 15 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:  
    B. MoS compliance:  
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:  
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:  
    C. No original research:  
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:  
    B. Focused:  
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:  
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:  
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:  
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  


  • The infobox has recording details, yet these are long-winded and somewhat confusing. Please rewrite these clearly and concisely.
  • I have made some minor copy-editing changes in the 'Background' and 'Recording' sections to help the flow of prose
  • 'Release' section: there is a lot of missing information here, such as record label, release dates and formats.
  • First paragraph of 'Aftermath' section seems a bit PoV, and may need rewording, using quotations, or additional references. Also second sentence should be reworded so that it doesn't start with 'but'.
  • I have replaced the level three headers in the 'Track listing' section with bold lines
  • 'Personnel' section needs a source
  • In the 'Charts' section there are not several charts, so reorganise this information as prose, rather than tables.

There are some minor issues that need to be addressed. I will out the review on hold, and allow seven days for relevant changes to be made. Good luck improving the article! Adabow(complain) 10:12, 15 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

I guess everything is satisfied now - just make sure that the now-hidden paragraph is followed up on. Adabow(complain) 06:57, 19 July 2010 (UTC)Reply
I've restated it using a direct quotation. Agadant (talk) 14:30, 21 July 2010 (UTC)Reply