Talk:Pablo Honey/GA1

GA Review

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.

---

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

Nominator: PerfectSoundWhatever (talk · contribs) 23:02, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: The Sharpest Lives (talk · contribs) 00:11, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Hey! I'm Sam, aka The Sharpest Lives. I decided to review this article because I love radiohead and hope that this can reach GA, maybe even FA status. I'll get started on the review soon, probably around tomorrow. – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 00:11, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm going to place this on hold. Below you can see my suggestions, and once they are addressed I will feel ready to promote the article. Good job! – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 20:46, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

After looking over the article, I am ready to pass this. Time for a good topic! PS I found a source for the {{cn}} tag. – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 18:22, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

2. Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

3. Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Notes

Review

1. Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	Excellent lead	Pass
(b) (MoS)	Seems to follow MOS to me.	Pass

2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	Comments below	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Pass
(c) (original research)	Nothing appears to be OR	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	No copyvios detected	Pass

3. Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	Check	Pass
(b) (focused)	It goes into excellent detail. What a read!	Pass

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
No exceptional claims or anything non-neutral sounding	Pass

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Comment	Result
Relatively new and no sign of edit warring or ongoing	Pass

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	I checked on the album cover NFUR, it's all correct.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Pass

Result

Result	Notes
Pass	Check!

Background

• The Rolling Stone source calls Manic Hedgehog the unnoficial name of the demos. This should be reflected in the text. – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 15:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Done — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c)
• The New Yorker (Alex Ross) source doesn't say that EMI requested a name change, or that Radiohead signed a 6-album contract (though I feel like I've heard that somewhere else). These should be removed or sourced. – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 15:32, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Done, great catch — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c)
• "He was initially more impressed by Hufford and Edge than by Radiohead, calling them 'crafty mothers ... I don't think I've ever met two guys who had more of a plan.'" I can't find this quote on the MTV reference. Is it on another perhaps? – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 16:03, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Done, great catch — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c)

Release and promotion

• "... 'Creep' began receiving airplay on US radio stations and rose to number two on the US Modern Rock chart" this claim is not supported by the provided source (The New Yorker). Is it anywhere else? – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 18:08, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

  Neither is the claim "the music video for "Creep" was in heavy rotation on MTV". I think the source must be somewhere else on the website? I'm not sure. – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 18:11, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

  I did some digging but can't find unambiguous sources for these, apart from the US Modern Rock chart position. I'll trim. Popcornfud (talk) 08:32, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

• I can't find "'Creep' reached number seven on the UK Singles Chart" on the Billboard chart history provided. This should be removed unless otherwise sourced – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 18:30, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

  This is mentioned in the Randall book: "A year after its initial release, 'Creep' rocketed up to No. 7 on the U.K. singles chart." Popcornfud (talk) 08:08, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

  Whoops, I see PerfectSoundWhatever already sourced that. Thanks both. Popcornfud (talk) 08:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

  • Done — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c)
• "On 13 May 1995, a live video, Live at the Astoria (1995), was released on VHS." could you clarify that this contains music from Pablo Honey? Otherwise it seems like a random addition. – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 18:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Done — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c)

Critical reception & Legacy

• Each review listed in the {{Music ratings}} template should have its own mention in the prose as well. Calgary Herald and Select are examples of reviews lacking prose. – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 18:46, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

  First I've heard of this idea. Is this stipulated in a guideline somewhere? Popcornfud (talk) 03:26, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

  I based it off of the info on the template page, which says "The template is not to be a substitute for a section in paragraph form, since a review can not be accurately boiled down to a simple rating out of five stars or other numeric score." I assumed this applied to all reviews, but feel free to object. – The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 03:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

  It's a beneficial thing to do, but I would guess that most agree it's not a requirement to pass the GA criteria. I've found a text copy of the Calgary Herald source on ProQuest. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 04:47, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

  Sounds fair. My only other comment left open is the first under "Release and promotion".– The Sharpest Lives (💬•✏️•ℹ️) 05:00, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

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.