Talk:Fanny (band)/GA1

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

Reviewer: 78.26 (talk · contribs) 15:36, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * C. It contains no original research:  The sentence "During tours, female fans would ask the group how to form a band and what skills were required" seems to come from  "All over the country Fanny has been approached by young girls asking about the machinations of forming a rock band."  Is there an additional source to support the statement?  In particular the last part "what skills were required" seems a bit of a stretch from that one sentence.   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 18:52, 12 March 2019 (UTC)  This has been addressed.   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 17:10, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: - Note:  Matches come from quotation, and on phrase ("first all-female band to sign with a major label") which would be difficult to state otherwise in a non-awkward manner.   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 18:13, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: Note:  Catalog numbers (US issues, since primary activity was there) and chart positions would be nice in the "Discography" section, and also a complete listing of singles would be nice.  That's just a wishlist from a record nerd, and really shouldn't be a factor in GA status.   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 19:01, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:  Article tone is faultlessly neutral.  However, only highly positive reviews of their music is included.  Were there any contemporary reviews of their albums or concerts that were mixed or negative?    78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 19:01, 12 March 2019 (UTC)  This is also addressed.  Thank you for the additional content.  Although this article could be improved with more weight towards criticism (good/bad/neutral) concurrent with the band's active years, this is a good article review, not a perfect article review.   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 17:10, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:  I wonder if Template:PD-US-no notice applies to that 1970 photo.   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 19:01, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 19:06, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:  Article tone is faultlessly neutral.  However, only highly positive reviews of their music is included.  Were there any contemporary reviews of their albums or concerts that were mixed or negative?    78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 19:01, 12 March 2019 (UTC)  This is also addressed.  Thank you for the additional content.  Although this article could be improved with more weight towards criticism (good/bad/neutral) concurrent with the band's active years, this is a good article review, not a perfect article review.   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 17:10, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:  I wonder if Template:PD-US-no notice applies to that 1970 photo.   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 19:01, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 19:06, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 19:06, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Pass or Fail:   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 19:06, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Taking comments in turn (both on this page and found elsewhere)
 * I have added some less positive views of the group; they weren't as well-received in the US compared to the UK and Europe and contemporary record companies treated them as a gimmick. That's pretty much it, though - more recent coverage of the group is pretty much uniformly positive.
 * I've trimmed out "what skills were required" (per comment in 2C). The Billboard interview was a good find, but if there are any similar interviews from that period, they'll be hard to discover.
 * I've added chart positions for the two albums that were hits, and ensure each entry is backed up with an inline citation. I haven't included the labels or catalog numbers as this doesn't appear to be consistent with other band GAs; for example, Van der Graaf Generator just lists title and year in brackets.
 * I don't have any sources explaining why Brie Brandt rejoined the group. The band's official website, which is as pretty much close to the comprehensive truth as one could expect to get, simply says "Alice was replaced on drums by former Svelte Brie Brandt". I can only speculate she was simply socially compatible and available to work with the remaining members.
 * I rather figured as much.  78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 17:10, 13 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Vanamonde is correct that this source is not reliable and should not be used. I think this is simply a matter of picking the wrong URL - the actual Boston Globe source is used elsewhere.
 * I'm a bit chagrined I missed that, as I agree regarding the quality of the source. The claim was directly cited by another source I had previously read, so I didn't examine as I should have.  Bad source was replaced by said source, so this is all good now.   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 17:10, 13 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Doomsdayer should be able to give you more information about the photo - it hasn't been challenged in the five years it's been there so I assume silence = consensus. I have tried to find a PD-US photograph in the Billboard archives (which were incredibly fruitful when expanding The Carpenters) but didn't uncover anything. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  10:46, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Most of my work on the Fanny article was done in around 2013-14 and before I got to it, the infobox had an awful out-of-focus stage shot from a recent performance by the Millington sisters, which technically was not a FANNY photo. I could not find anything free to use at the time, so I used the cover of the Fanny Hill album, which offers a great group portrait and was eligible under the Fair Use rules. But Ritchie has created a brand new article for Fanny Hill (album), which is now the most logical place for that image. The Non-Free experts at WP may conclude that the album cover image should only be used now for the album article and not for the band article. If a copyright-compliant band photo from 1970-74 cannot be found through the usual channels, it might be viable to ask the folks at the Fanny website for a contribution. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 14:50, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The relevant policy says "For some retired or disbanded groups, or retired individuals whose notability rests in large part on their earlier visual appearance, a new picture may not serve the same purpose as an image taken during their career, in which case the use would be acceptable." The "classic line up" are extremely unlikely to ever reunite, so future opportunities to take a free photo can be reasonably expected to not exist. However, a key point about Fanny is they didn't rely at all on their visual appearance and achieved notability purely on ability and merit, and a typical reader is going to "get" what a photo of June Millington holding a guitar is about, regardless of whether it was taken in 1969, 1979, 1989 or 2019. It's all a bit of a grey area; my understanding of criteria 6a is that you should supply a FUR and it should survive cross-examination, which it has done. A CC-BY-SA photo released from the band's archives would be great; this photo in particular would be a better image than what we have now, if the photographer, Linda Wolf (who is still around) was prepared to release a free version of it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  15:24, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I am certainly not going to fail based on this. Many pre-1977 US albums don't have copyright notices regarding the cover art, which is why I suggest it might be checked.   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 17:10, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

According to all the above, I am deeming this a "good article". 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 17:10, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, 78.26. Hope you enjoyed the GA reviewing experience, it's not too bad when you get used to it, and stick to topics you are (or can get) interested in. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  17:25, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me, FYI. A final minor suggestion; it might be worth duplicating the references about the lineup in the lineup section. The information is already sourced in the body, so this isn't a GA pass criterion, but it could make it easier for future readers. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:33, 13 March 2019 (UTC)