Talk:Just for the Record...

(Redirected from Talk:Just for the Record... (Barbra Streisand album))
Latest comment: 7 years ago by Cartoon network freak in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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.


This review is transcluded from Talk:Just for the Record... (Barbra Streisand album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cartoon network freak (talk · contribs) 21:19, 3 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Lead

edit
  • What's a "back catalog"?
A back catalog would be the entirety of a singer's discography prior to the release of a new album or song. Carbrera (talk) 20:47, 9 September 2017 (UTC).Reply
  • begin "platinum" with capital letter
Done
  • set a "(RIAA)" after "Recording Industry..."
Done
  • In the Netherlands, Highlights from Just for the Record peaked → ...the Record, a condensed version, peaked (for context)
Done

Infobox

edit
  • 1955–1989 → 1955–89
I believe there was recently a discussion somewhere on Wikipedia that suggested including the full year (rather than the condensed version) would be better for the reader. Carbrera (talk) 20:47, 9 September 2017 (UTC).Reply
  • Do you have a ref for the genre?
Done

Background and release

edit
  • It includes four discs with each → comma before "with"
Done
  • Release date in brackets for "You'll Never Know"
Done
  • and artwork → plural
Artwork actually wouldn't need a 's' to become plural. Carbrera (talk) 20:47, 9 September 2017 (UTC).Reply
  • includes live performances from → are live performances on
Done

Reception

edit
  • sixteen weeks → 16 weeks
Done
  • gold → Gold
Done
  • "(RIAA" after "Recording..."
Done
  • platinum → Platinum
Done
  • you can remove the brackets to commas
Done

Track listings

edit
  • Flawless ;)

Charts

edit
  • Flawless ;)

Certifications

edit
  • Flawless ;)

Other stuff

edit

Copy-violation

edit
  • 41.9% is slightly too much. Please cut out some content from the top citation.
It appears that the top citation from this checker is just so similar because of the extensive track listing [1]. From as far as I can see, this is the only thing triggering it. Carbrera (talk) 20:47, 9 September 2017 (UTC).Reply

References

edit
  • As far as I checked them, the references do cover the assertations made in this article (I can't verify the books, so I trust you with this!)
  • No dead links! Good job!

Outcome

edit
Gladly passing this! Best, Cartoon network freak (talk) 21:38, 9 September 2017 (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.