Talk:Rosanne Cash

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Former good article nomineeRosanne Cash was a Music good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 5, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed

Questioning Categorisation

The 'American Atheist' tag does not have sources in the text, and if it did have sources in the source material, it has been removed since citation; ergo, it seems that even if this category is correct, if she is in fact atheist, there are not references cited to support this, per "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable". I'm proposing either verification or removal. Thank you. Fraoch Dubh (talk) 00:47, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Married to Rodney Crowell at one time, does anyone know wether or not they had children? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.128.43.150 (talk) 19:07, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Try reading the article. It's in there. Cresix (talk) 04:07, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Rosanne Cash/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 05:37, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]


GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Number signs generally aren't allowed in text; for instance, #1 should be written out as No. 1 or number one. Otherwise, I see no formatting issues.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    See below; I had several issues with the citation, but adding them in bullet form breaks the GAList template.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    I don't think that the article discusses her 1980s material fully enough. This was the peak of her career, and it could easily be split into album-by-album detail. I was able to go into album-by-album detail on GAs for far less prolific artists, such as Joe Diffie. Also, does she have a middle name? If so, it should be added to the article.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Right now five images may seem like overkill, but if the article is lengthened per my suggestion, it'd probably be better off.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    The article still has a long way to go. As I said, use citation templates, weed out the bad references, and add more information on the segment for her 1980s career. I could probably take a whack at the expansion myself at some point.
Issues with sourcing
  • Source #4 (CountryWorks.com) is a 404.
  • Source #7 (Musician Guide) has been deemed unreliable in past GANs because the site lacks an editorial policy.
  • Source #17 (Legacy Recordings) seems to be just a directory listing. Could a better source be found?
  • I removed one source that was a Wikipedia mirror.
  • Source #21 (WNYC.org) is also a 404.
  • Some sources are formatted as bare links. I would also recommend using citation templates such as {{Cite web}} for neatness.
  • Finally, there was an interview in the external links which I removed, since it was almost singlehandedly spammed on several articles.

Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 05:37, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Rosanne Cash. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:19, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]