Talk:Teenage Whore/GA1

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

Reviewer: SilkTork (talk · contribs) 19:13, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I'll start reading over the next few days and then begin to make comments. I am normally a slow reviewer - if that is likely to be a problem, please let me know as soon as possible. I tend to directly do copy-editing and minor improvements as I'm reading the article rather than list them here; if there is a lot of copy-editing to be done I may suggest getting a copy-editor (on the basis that a fresh set of eyes is helpful). Anything more significant than minor improvements I will raise here. I see the reviewer's role as collaborative and collegiate, so I welcome discussion regarding interpretation of the criteria.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  19:10, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Tick box
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is clear and concise, without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Comments on GA criteria

 * Pass
 * There is a single image, and that meets GA criteria.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  23:12, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Has a reference section.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  23:14, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * It's stable.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  23:15, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Prose is fine.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  23:20, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * No section is over long or too detailed.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  23:22, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The article is neutral in tone and presentation.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  23:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Meets MoS.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  23:42, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * No OR noticed. Statements matched sources.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  23:48, 19 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Query
 * Article feels a bit thin. Could you do a little more research and build it up. It does seem to be a song that attracts attention. Here's some potential sources:, , , , , .  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  23:41, 19 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Fail
 * A couple of cites are required. Marked with tags in the article.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  23:47, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

On hold

 * Decent little article on an early song by Hole. Probably a little thin considering how much the song is mentioned in reliable sources, and there are a couple of statements that need sourcing. Other than that, no problems. On hold to allow those two issues to be looked into.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  23:50, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Nominator nudged.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  14:35, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Not passed
Concerns regarding citing not addressed, and no contact from nominator.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  11:34, 30 November 2013 (UTC)