Talk:My Immortal (song)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Ruby2010 (talk • message • contribs • count  • [/wiki/Special:Log?user= logs ] • email) 02:27, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Looking over this discussion really got me thinking about my typical subject matter for GA reviews. Note that I've never reviewed a music article before, but I like this song so I'll give it a shot. I'll probably review it in the next day or two.  R uby2010  comment!  02:27, 1 September 2011 (UTC)


 * 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):
 * Sentences with quotes need citations directly at end of sentence (i.e. that one in the lead, ""a spirit staying with you after its death and haunting you until you actually wish that the spirit were gone because it won't leave you alone." and others)
 * Too many "It"s in second paragraph of Background section. When starting a new paragraph, re-identify the subject (i.e. "My Immortal" or something similar)
 * "My Immortal" is a song of pain and despair caused by the loss of a family member or very close friend and how it drove her to the edge of insanity.[13]" Drove who over the edge of insanity? Clarify. Plus clarify this is IGN's opinion (unless you have info or a direct quote from the song writer).
 * I think the "Alex Nunn of musicOMH" review should be put in chronological order. In fact, I think all of the song comparison reviews should be placed at end of paragraph. Just a personal preference thing though.
 * Too many "____ called it" in reception section. Change it up.


 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * "The song is heavily praised by fans, and is included within most of the band's live performances due to its success." Source?
 * Ref 50: retrieval date?
 * Ref 50: retrieval date?


 * 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:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail:

Interesting article. I'll place the article on hold for seven days while the above issues get looked at. Please respond here when you have finished. Thanks,  R uby2010   comment!  03:08, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I think I've done everything. Please check did I miss something. My love is love (talk) 05:40, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks good. Happy to pass this one for GA.  R uby2010   comment!  16:05, 2 September 2011 (UTC)