Talk:Video Anthology (video)

Video Anthology (video) 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.
Review: November 4, 2014. (Reviewed version).

Albums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Beyoncé Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Beyoncé, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Beyoncé 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.BeyoncéWikipedia:WikiProject BeyoncéTemplate:WikiProject BeyoncéBeyoncé articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

R&B and Soul Music Low‑importance

	R&B and Soul Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles 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.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Destiny's Child Video Anthology/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cirt (talk · contribs) 17:52, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this article. — Cirt (talk) 17:52, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stability review[edit]

I've looked over the article edit history going back to inception and found no problems.
Also upon inspection talk page shows no ongoing conflicts either.

Next, on to image review. — Cirt (talk) 22:52, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image review[edit]

File:Destiny Child Video Anthology.jpg = one image used in article, fair use image.

@My love is love:Image page fair use rationale unacceptable at this time. Please see a better model at File:Weird Al Yankovic Permanent Record.jpg. Can you please improve the fair use rationale at the image page? — Cirt (talk) 00:23, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I've gone ahead and fixed the image page myself. :) — Cirt (talk) 00:26, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thank you a lot. I Am... ***D.D. 15:55, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Successful good article nomination[edit]

I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of November 4, 2014, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Writing quality is good. Lede intro sect could be expanded a tad bit more, but good enough for GA at this time.

2. Verifiable?: Duly cited throughout, with good use of in-line citations and reference formatting.

3. Broad in coverage?: Good job on coverage major aspects, including Background, Release, Reception, and track info.

4. Neutral point of view?: Article is pretty good at staying matter-of-fact, with neutral tone throughout.

5. Stable? Stability is fine for good article, per stability review, above.

6. Images?: One image wasn't good enough on image page, but I fixed that myself, so now it's good.

It's all good. :) If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to have it Good article reassessed. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations.— — Cirt (talk) 16:44, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]