Talk:One in a Million (Aaliyah album)

Latest comment: 21 hours ago by Kyle Peake in topic GA Review

Orphaned references in One in a Million (Aaliyah album)

edit

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of One in a Million (Aaliyah album)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "CRIA":

  • From Aaliyah discography: "Database Search". Canadian Recording Industry Association. Retrieved July 29, 2007.
  • From Age Ain't Nothing but a Number: "Canadian Recording Industry Association (CRIA): Certfication Results". Canadian Recording Industry Association. Retrieved May 17, 2009.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 07:40, 30 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on One in a Million (Aaliyah album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:23, 9 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on One in a Million (Aaliyah album). 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 16:45, 29 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:One in a Million (Aaliyah album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Moonlighttt (talk · contribs) 16:21, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 21:41, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply


  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. (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:  

(Criteria marked   are unassessed)

This will run over the next two days! --K. Peake 21:41, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply