Talk:Good Charlotte (album)
 | Good Charlotte (album) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: November 21, 2019. (Reviewed version). |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Good Charlotte (album) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
Untitled[edit]
How come the release date(s) on this page, and on the Good Charlotte page are different? From amazon.com Im seeing September 26, 2000 and September 26, 2000 --70.152.219.126 13:10, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
GA Review[edit]
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Good Charlotte (album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: SilkTork (talk · contribs) 10:40, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
I'll start reading over the next few days and then begin to make comments. I am normally a slow reviewer - if that is likely to be a problem, please let me know as soon as possible. I tend to directly do copy-editing and minor improvements as I'm reading the article rather than list them here; if there is a lot of copy-editing to be done I may suggest getting a copy-editor (on the basis that a fresh set of eyes is helpful). Anything more significant than minor improvements I will raise here. I see the reviewer's role as collaborative and collegiate, so I welcome discussion regarding interpretation of the criteria. SilkTork (talk)
Tick box[edit]
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
Comments on GA criteria[edit]
- Pass
- Has an appropriate reference section. SilkTork (talk) 15:07, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
- Article is stable. SilkTork (talk) 15:09, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
- The one image is tagged and used appropriately. SilkTork (talk) 15:10, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
- Richly cited, and cites go to acceptable sources which when checked support what is said in the article. SilkTork (talk) 15:21, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
- No detectable copyvio issues. SilkTork (talk) 14:28, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
- Query
- Fail
General comments[edit]
- Prose generally looks good, but the opening sentence, "Good Charlotte is the self-titled debut studio album by American rock band Good Charlotte, which was formed in 1996", appears to conflate the album with the band. To avoid copnfusion the opening sentence should be about the album, so "Good Charlotte is the self-titled debut studio album by American rock band Good Charlotte, which was released in 2000." Or, better, "Good Charlotte, released in 2000 through Epic and Daylight Records, is the self-titled debut studio album by American rock band Good Charlotte." SilkTork (talk) 15:05, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Pass[edit]
I've tidied up the lead. The article is fine, meets GA criteria. No further quibbles. Listing as a Good Article. SilkTork (talk) 14:43, 21 November 2019 (UTC)