Talk:My Love Is Pink

My Love Is Pink has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 16, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Women in Music

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

It's not a pop/RnB song!!!!!!!!!! It's pop/dance, even it could be concidered pure dance/club sound! it's everything but RnB!

My Love Is Pink - Digitial Single[edit]

My Love Is Pink has been released as a digitial single(http://www.7digital.com/artists/sugababes/my-love-is-pink). 195.194.178.154 (talk) 20:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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:My Love Is Pink/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 00:00, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review[edit]

First comments[edit]

Lead paragraph too long as a single one. Split into 2. (already done)
No sample? =(
- Idk how to upload them. Till 13:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'll upload it for you =). —Hahc21 ^{[TALK][CONTRIBS]} 14:20, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks! :) Till 02:06, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, i've read the entire article and is flawless on prose. Checking the references by tomorrow. —Hahc21 ^{[TALK][CONTRIBS]} 03:16, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

We have a problem with reference No.12. When using the {{singlechart}} template for Slovakia, week and year are mandatory for the chart to properly work. You didn't specified those parameters and thus the chart position is unverifiable. Could you please add them? =)

—Hahc21 ^{[TALK][CONTRIBS]} 21:47, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Till 02:06, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Verdict[edit]

Ok, i'll upload the sample later, everything is done.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

—Hahc 21 02:11, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Hahc21. Till 03:22, 16 June 2012 (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.