Talk:Forever Now (The Psychedelic Furs album)/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.'' I am going to review this article for possible Good Article status. Reviewer: Shearonink (talk · contribs) 01:59, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Passes the threshold "immediate failure" criteria: No cleanup banners, no obvious copyright infringements, etc. Shearonink (talk) 02:04, 31 December 2016 (UTC)


 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * Really well-done. Hits all the important highlights without devolving into trivia central or general fancruft.  I'll be honest, this is probably the first WP article about an album I've ever read, and I think it's terrific.
 * 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:
 * Ref #35 is dead.
 * I've added a working archive url for this. SteveStrummer (talk) 18:12, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Ref #48 has an odd redirect...are you sure it is ending up where it needs to be to source that statement? Same with Ref #21.
 * Both of these pointed to 'Charts' tabs on AllMusic which no longer exist. In fact one of the entries was wrong – perhaps that's why the tabs have been taken down! Accordingly I've removed Ref #48, and added a new source for Ref #21. SteveStrummer (talk) 18:12, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * All of the above issues have been resolved.
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * Pending the correcting of some referencing issues.
 * Fixed.
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * Ran the copyvio tool - no plagiarism found.
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * Fascinating read - I feel like it was a thriller....will the album get made? Will the band let Flo & Eddie perform? etc.
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 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:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * I know that there are probably improvements that could be made but I'm not seeing them at this time - maybe Wikilinking the term "Gold (record)" to [[Music recording for anyone unfamiliar with the term...  And I'll be frank with anyone who reads this afterwards, I started on this Review without much enthusiasm, just trying to so some reviews and I picked this one out.  I don't know all that much about Rundgren's work as a producer or about The Psychedelic Furs, didn't know that Flo&Eddie/The Turtles sang on this album, and so on.  And now I do and now I am a little fascinated with the individuals and this music.  Thank you to all the notable contributors to this article, it was a pleasure. Shearonink (talk) 18:47, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your review! SteveStrummer (talk) 19:24, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * I know that there are probably improvements that could be made but I'm not seeing them at this time - maybe Wikilinking the term "Gold (record)" to [[Music recording for anyone unfamiliar with the term...  And I'll be frank with anyone who reads this afterwards, I started on this Review without much enthusiasm, just trying to so some reviews and I picked this one out.  I don't know all that much about Rundgren's work as a producer or about The Psychedelic Furs, didn't know that Flo&Eddie/The Turtles sang on this album, and so on.  And now I do and now I am a little fascinated with the individuals and this music.  Thank you to all the notable contributors to this article, it was a pleasure. Shearonink (talk) 18:47, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your review! SteveStrummer (talk) 19:24, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I know that there are probably improvements that could be made but I'm not seeing them at this time - maybe Wikilinking the term "Gold (record)" to [[Music recording for anyone unfamiliar with the term...  And I'll be frank with anyone who reads this afterwards, I started on this Review without much enthusiasm, just trying to so some reviews and I picked this one out.  I don't know all that much about Rundgren's work as a producer or about The Psychedelic Furs, didn't know that Flo&Eddie/The Turtles sang on this album, and so on.  And now I do and now I am a little fascinated with the individuals and this music.  Thank you to all the notable contributors to this article, it was a pleasure. Shearonink (talk) 18:47, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your review! SteveStrummer (talk) 19:24, 1 January 2017 (UTC)