Talk:Sabrina the Teenage Witch: The Album

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Sabrina the Teenage Witch: The Album/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Grk1011 (talk · contribs) 12:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Hi Breaktheicees, I will be reviewing this for you! Expect comments within the next few days. Grk1011 (talk) 12:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

  • image properly licensed
  • The genres don't appear to be discussed in the body. A couple refs described them, but I don't think they made it into the article itself.
  • add "the" before Spice Girls
  • add "series actress" before Melissa Joan Hart
  • No need for refs in the WP:LEAD since it is a summary of what's in the article.
  • Is there a source for the 700,000 copies? It looks like you might have just added up the US and Canada certification thresholds. That might be fine to mention, but it doesn't mean "worldwide".

Background

  • Where does it state that the sequencing was slightly modified? The ref link isn't numbered, so it's not clear to me that they were saying it was the ordered track listing.
  • Don't pipe "A&R", write it out as "artists and repertoire".
  • Where in the ref does it say Coburn was "instrumental"?
  • Fix ref order of 6, 3 so that it's 3, 6
  • Fix ref order of 7, 5
  • Fix ref order 10, 5
  • Reword the last sentence. It's a bit hard to follow.
  • I'm not sure the Spice Girls photo adds much to the article, but it's licensed properly.

Critical reception

  • Fine

Commercial reception

  • The RIAA and Music Canada links list the certification dates, so you might as well note them in the article

References

  • General comment: wikilink website, publisher, etc. If they are magazines and newspapers, make sure you a using "magazine=" or "newspaper=" to show the names in italics.
  • General comment: add access dates to all refs that are missing them. This helps for eventual archiving by bots.
  • General comment: Fix the date format of the refs to align with article body (month day, year)
  • 10. This ref needs more detail so that readers can figure out what it is. I think it's a book? ISBN, etc.
  • 18. This is the wrong date for the Billboard 200 link [it's the link for October 10, 1998 issue (which is also ref 5)].
  • 19. This ref doesn't work. Can you see if an archive link exists? You can try using the bot: [1]
  • 22. This ref doesn't work.

Other thoughts and discussion

This looks pretty good and doesn't look like it needs much work. I'd recommend using the liner notes to add a Personnel section, however. This would also allow to add refs for the producers in the infobox.  On hold until revisions are made or responses to the above are received. Good job! Grk1011 (talk) 20:52, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Breaktheicees: checking in. Grk1011 (talk) 13:36, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. Thank you and apologies for the delay. I'll get to working on it shortly. Breaktheicees (talk) 23:49, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Should be good to go now. In regards to the sequencing of the track list being modified, it's true that the MTV link isn't entirely clear on the numbering, but one of the advance copies of the CD more clearly shows an alternate track list, so I put that ref in. The formerly 19-numbered ref works for me, but I added archive links to all of the PDFs just in case. Breaktheicees (talk) 01:51, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looks great! I made a few small tweaks. Passing now! Grk1011 (talk) 15:48, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by reviewer, closed by AirshipJungleman29 talk 04:55, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Created by Breaktheicees (talk). Self-nominated at 08:29, 23 November 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Sabrina the Teenage Witch: The Album; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • Comment only It would be good if you could tidy up the main hook; you are linking to a disambiguation page, and another link is a redirect. Both are not permissible for the main page. Schwede66 23:12, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Long enough, technically not new enough but for want of a few hours I'm not complaining. Both ALTs cited and short enough, though ALT0 is unlikely to be interesting to those unfamiliar with the names and ALT1 is only slightly better. No maintenance templates found, no neutrality issues found, no valid copyright concerns found. What makes ref #12 reliable?--Launchballer 09:49, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I removed that ref because it doesn't seem reliable to me either @Launchballer: other than that, does this nom look ready? BuySomeApples (talk) 02:24, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good enough for me. Let's roll.--Launchballer 09:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BuySomeApples: I don't find the hooks that interesting, as they try to contain too much information and suffer for it; as DYK slots are currently under high demand, I won't be promoting them. Other promoters may disagree. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:57, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @AirshipJungleman29: I'm not the reviewer or the nominator, that would be @Breaktheicees and Launchballer: I can try to think of alt hooks though. BuySomeApples (talk) 05:07, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, my mistake. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:39, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BuySomeApples: If you could come up with any more or tweak those ones, that'd be great. I'm not sure how I could shorten those while keeping them interesting at the same time. I appreciate the help! Breaktheicees (talk) 11:20, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That'd be how I'd punchify it, but I wouldn't really consider it an interestingness pass. It doesn't raise any questions, it's just relying on people to see "Britney Spears" and click (which they don't really do). theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 20:29, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • This nomination has been open for more than two months and is not progressing, so it will be rejected. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 04:54, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Sabrina_the_Teenage_Witch:_The_Album"