Talk:Built to Spill Plays the Songs of Daniel Johnston/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Tim O'Doherty (talk · contribs) 20:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

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

Nominator requested I review one of their GANs after kindly reviewing three of mine, which, now that I have returned from down south, will do. Review will come after I've taken a good look at the article. ChristieBot can be a bit slow, so pinging now. Tim O&#39;Doherty (talk) 20:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC) (Criteria marked are unassessed)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):
 * Looks good, can't really nitpick any of it.
 * b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Nothing bad, can't pick out anything wrong. Just had to add a full stop (or, given this article is written in AmE, a "period").
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a. (reference section):
 * b. (citations to reliable sources):
 * I don't know of the general reliability of some of the sources, but AGF; a lot are opinion pieces anyway, and are there to verify the quotations.
 * c. (OR):
 * No OR.
 * d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * Earwig gives 30.1%, which is a bit high but nothing alarming, given that it's mostly quotes and the name that it's picking up on.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a. (major aspects):
 * b. (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Good'n'neutral, the reviews are weighed against each other equally.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * Fair use rationale on the one image looks fine to me.
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * No caption, but that's to be expected for articles on albums and songs.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * Well done to and anybody else who worked on this article. Tim O&#39;Doherty (talk) 20:46, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Good'n'neutral, the reviews are weighed against each other equally.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
 * Fair use rationale on the one image looks fine to me.
 * b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * No caption, but that's to be expected for articles on albums and songs.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * Well done to and anybody else who worked on this article. Tim O&#39;Doherty (talk) 20:46, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * No caption, but that's to be expected for articles on albums and songs.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/fail:
 * Well done to and anybody else who worked on this article. Tim O&#39;Doherty (talk) 20:46, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Well done to and anybody else who worked on this article. Tim O&#39;Doherty (talk) 20:46, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Well done to and anybody else who worked on this article. Tim O&#39;Doherty (talk) 20:46, 9 July 2023 (UTC)