Talk:Fuck the Facts/GA1

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

I have requested a second opinion. I have a feeling this article may meet a quick fail criteria as the dates accessed and publisher have not been put in the references. However, I am not sure, so I have requested a second opinion. Thanks -- Sk8er5000 (talk) 05:33, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, that would mean that the article would be placed on hold. I have not fully read the article, just looked at the reference section, and I see that there are no proper citations. If the article still looks good, and the citations are a problem, I would place the article on hold and ask the nominator to fix that. However, I don't know if that's the only problem. CarpetCrawler (talk) 05:39, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The whole musical style section is unreferenced and possible original research. This article needs much more work to become a good article. Hekerui (talk) 09:15, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Failed as meeting the Reliable Sources quickfail criteria. -- Sk8er5000 (talk) 21:36, 3 April 2009 (UTC)