Talk:Nå skruva Fiolen/GA1

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Kyle Peake in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 16:19, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply


Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose ( ) 1b. MoS ( ) 2a. ref layout ( ) 2b. cites WP:RS ( ) 2c. no WP:OR ( ) 2d. no WP:CV ( )
3a. broadness ( ) 3b. focus ( ) 4. neutral ( ) 5. stable ( ) 6a. free or tagged images ( ) 6b. pics relevant ( )
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked   are unassessed

I will undertake this review tomorrow. --K. Peake 16:19, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Super, thanks! Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:22, 18 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Infobox and lead edit

  • Infobox looks good!
    • Thanks.
  • "and mimics the rhythm" → "and mimicking the rhythm"
    • Done.
  • "and certainly pretended to play it" → "certainly pretending to play it"
    • Done.
  • Use double speech marks instead for "screw"
    • Done.
  • Add a sentence mentioning Fred Åkerström's recording at the end of the lead, as this is notable
    • Done.

Background edit

  • Good
    • Noted.

Epistle edit

Music and verse form edit

  • Add relevant text to the audio sample to justify its usage
    • Done.
  • Wikilink cello
    • Done.
  • Pipe 2
    4
    time to Duple and quadruple metre
    • Done.
  • Wikilink timbre
    • Not done, the article is about the quality of a tone, not the meaning here.
  • "on the 3rd and 4th lines," → "on the third and fourth lines," per MOS:NUM
    • Done.

Lyrics edit

  • Img looks good!
    • Noted.
  • "It is subtitled" → "The composition is subtitled" to avoid overusage of it
    • Done.
  • Remove commas around Paul Britten Austin
    • Done.
  • Versions of the start of Epistle No. 2 → Starting lines of Epistle No. 2
    • Done.

Reception and legacy edit

Notes edit

  • Shouldn't there be sources for the info of the notes since they are not mentioning anything corresponding with refs next to them?
    • Added.

References edit

  • Copyvio score is undetectable at 0%!!!!
    • Noted.
  • Shouldn't ref 10 be cited in place of ref 6 since that also invokes p. 63?
    • Noted, but ref 6 is more specific, which is better for its task.
  • Cite Bellman.net as publisher instead on ref 9
    • Done.
  • WP:OVERLINK of Fred Åkerström on ref 15
    • Done.
  • Pipe WEA Records to Warner Music Group and fix WP:OVERLINK of Fred Åkerström on ref 16
    • Done.
  • Pipe Sterling to Sterling Records (Sweden) on ref 17
    • Done.

Sources edit

  • Good
    • Thanks.

External links edit

  • Shouldn't you write on YouTube after the links to the videos?
    • Done.

Final comments and verdict edit

  •  Pass now, quick response once again! --K. Peake 07:06, 20 June 2022 (UTC)Reply