Talk:Finally Home/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk · contribs) 03:09, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found.

Linkrot: four foun and tagged. Jezhotwells (talk) 03:19, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Substantive review will be posted within 24 hours, Jezhotwells (talk) 03:19, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

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


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * "Finally Home" was written after lead singer Bart Millard heard guitarists Mike Scheuchzer and Barry Graul improving with an acoustic guitar riff "improving with"?
 * According to Millard, he "wrote the first line and just started bawling. Who is the "he" here?
 * All of this background section is either quotes or a close paraphrase of the source. It also doesn't really add any information about the song.
 * On the Adult Contemporary chart, "Finally Home" debuted at No. 27 for the chart week of April 4, 2009,[12][16] a spot it held for two weeks.[12] The song advanced to No. 27 in in its third chart week, If it debuted at no 27, how could it advance to no 27?
 * Give the article a thorough copy-edit, please
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Ref #2 doesn't actually say that "Finally Home" is country influenced.
 * Ref #5 doesn't say 64 bpm
 * Ref #12 doesn't actually report any chart positions.
 * Four dead links.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * The video features the band performing the song live, with heavy uses of special effects in between and during shots. This conveys no useful information at all. In fact the whole article conveys very little encyclopaedic information.  It may well be that there is very little to be said about such a minor pop song.  Certainly I see nothing here to see that it satisfies criterion #5
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * The tone tends towards fancruft
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * Stable
 * 1) 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):
 * The image has a source image tag.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * A slight article with little useful content, I believe that this fails criterion '5, there are also a number of other issues. Not listed. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:25, 14 December 2011 (UTC)