Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Shenandoah (band)/1
Shenandoah (band) edit
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: Kept. We can only source what we have sources for so the absence of sources for a particular aspect of an article is not necessarily a problem. It is probably a good indication that that aspect is not note worthy. Having an outdated picture is not an issue for much the same reasons. This article was passed as a good article by one of our better reviewers and I am seeing nothing in the current version that prevents it from maintaining that status. AIRcorn (talk) 03:04, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
My main concern is that the article kind of falls apart, due to constant membership change in the band from 2008 onward. The main picture shows a long outdated lineup, and most of the members have been unverifiable (Even at the time of GA, the only way to verify who actually was in the band was through Wayback Machine and Facebook.) The rest of the article seems to hold up all right, but those last few sections are my main concern. I was unable to find much in terms of sourcing for the constant membership changes ever since. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 20:27, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
- Re-assessing your own GAs again, Hammer? You seem quite modest about your work. I don't see anything amiss about the GA criteria except for maybe that last sentence. That's personally the only thing I would agree with because it doesn't have a source at all. If a primary source is all we can use, we're allowed to use it as long as we A) take care not to misuse it, B) we don't overuse them, or C) use them when others are available which are clearly better (you seem not to think so). As for the picture, I see no issue with that, if there are no others available, use it, because that's our only option. That does not affect GA criteria. Take pride in your work, it looks really good to me. I say keep if any source is available for last paragraph and otherwise meets GA criteria, but I can't be completely certain here. Danny from IP 104.39.152.54 (talk) 15:08, 26 September 2017 (UTC)