Talk:Turning Tables

File:Adele - Turning Tables.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Adele - Turning Tables.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Adele - Turning Tables.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 04:08, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Turning Tables/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Paul MacDermott (talk · contribs) 12:50, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

This is my first attempt at a GA review, so please bear with me if I mess anything up. As far as I can tell there are no deadlinks or links to disambiguation pages. Further comments below. Paul MacDermott (talk) 13:32, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   Prose, lead and layout all fairly good. Reasonable length for GA. Have corrected a couple of typos, but apart from that it seems fine. I think you might consider relocating the "Broadway worthy" part in the lead to the part that talks about how the song was received as this appears to be someone's view, but that shouldn't prevent it from becoming a Good Article.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   Well referenced and citations appear throughout. A spot check of references confirms accuracy, and no evidence of original research. I note a ref in the lead. While this isn't a problem with GA, it would have to be removed if the article were to go forward to FAC. Generally the lead should be an overview of the article's main points, and the argument goes that everything in the main body of the text should be referenced, so refs in the lead are not necessary.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   Article gives a broad perspective on the subject, with background and detail when necessary.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   No issues regarding neutrality.

5. It is stable.

   While the main Adele article has been protected for several months due to issues, this article has been stable for several months with no major problems with edit wars or vandalism.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   A number of images are used to illustrate the subject, all of which appear to be stable. Also an audio sample, which is useful for anyone who may be unfamiliar with the song.

7. Overall:

   Pass: This is an interesting article in which the author has invested a lot of work, and I have no hesitation in passing it. I think the lead would have to be expanded if this was to go forward to FAC at any future point, but I don't think this is a problem for GA. Paul MacDermott (talk) 13:32, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Not to be confused with....

TURNINGTABLES. --Pawyilee (talk) 15:57, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Your point being? Paul MacDermott (talk) 16:53, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 16 November 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved (closed by non-admin page mover) Calidum 17:11, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

---

Turning Tables → Turning Tables (song) – May be confused with "turning the tables". 173.168.100.26 (talk) 02:32, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

• Support turning tables is clearly a common phrase, under such circumstances (song) is only helpful. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:06, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose, "turning tables" (a redirect that was just created in response to this RM, FWIW) is a phrase that is distinct from "Turning the Tables". Unnecessary disambiguation, WP:SMALLDETAILS. 162 etc. (talk) 18:42, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose, no evidence provided. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 20:40, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose per above, this seems to be the only thing so called. Crouch, Swale (talk) 07:38, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose. There is only one article with turning tables as the name. "Turning tables" is distinct from "turning the tables". Adumbrativus (talk) 09:20, 18 November 2021 (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.