Talk:Songs by George Harrison/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 23:25, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say this isn't ready for GA. The "Track listing" and "personnel" sections are entirely unreferenced. Multiple completely unreferenced sections/subsections is an automatic fail. Additionally, two reviews from critics doesn't seem like very much, especially with a "legacy" section in place. Sales (or at least some indicator of commercial performance) are also missing from the article. Please expand and thoroughly source the article before renominating. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:25, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

@SNUGGUMS: I simply can't believe you've failed this. You know as well as I do that in this case the "multiple completely unreferenced sections/subsections" amounts to just two missing references, given that the sections are lists (Track listing and Personnel). Not only that but I've seen you prepared to give nominations a heckuva lot of work in the past (eg at Genesis). I dare say I might be able to find another review or two, but the whole point about this work's legacy is how rare it is – hence its high ranking on Record Collector's Most Valuable Records list. Sales? Well, only 2500 copies were released, available only through Genesis Publication direct; so yes, what's missing is a statement to say they all sold out.

All in all, it's about 5 minutes of work needed to turn this around – why would you fail the nomination? JG66 (talk) 00:34, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

I failed because uncited sections are verifiability concerns, and breadth didn't look up to par (at least compared to other articles on books and/or music). I would've said the same for any article with multiple entirely unreferenced sections (unless one of them was a plot section). Sorry if I misjudged how much info would be available, though. It just felt incomplete. Regards, Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:49, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

@SNUGGUMS: Thanks for the reply. Would you mind transcluding the review to the talk page (or whatever it is that needs to happen)? Reason being, I've yet to receive notification on my talk page that the nomination failed, so I assume it can't be renominated until then. Thanks, JG66 (talk) 01:59, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

You actually do not need to recieve that notification before renominating. Editors are free to renominate an article that failed at GAN as soon as review comments are addressed. The only exception is if the article is currently unstable and/or failed for stability concerns, where the article would need to settle in such cases, especially if there's a content dispute and/or ongoing massive updates. This article is perfectly stable as far as I can tell. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:58, 12 January 2016 (UTC)