Talk:Tom Lehrer/GA1

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

Reviewer: Tim riley (talk · contribs) 11:44, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Starting first read-through. More as soon as possible.  Tim riley  talk    11:44, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

This enjoyable article is not yet ready for GA. There are far too many statements that lack citations, and I'm sorry to say it is an immediate fail. If this problem is systematically addressed it will be worth considering renominating the article for GA.  Tim riley  talk    12:10, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Academic and military career
 * First paragraph – uncited
 * Third paragraph – has a "citation needed" tag
 * Musical career
 * First paragraph – uncited
 * Fourth paragraph – uncited except for the quotation.
 * Fifth paragraph – has a "citation needed" tag
 * Sixth paragraph – has "citation needed" and "speculation tags", and no citations whatever
 * Eight paragraph – no citations
 * Revivals and discographic reissues
 * Two uncited paragraphs
 * Musical legacy
 * First paragraph – has a "citation needed" tag
 * Second paragraph – citation lacking for Shuch quotation
 * Sixth paragraph – uncited
 * Seventh paragraph – has a "citation needed" tag and is mostly without citations
 * Eighth paragraph – has a "citation needed" tag and is completely without citations


 * you may wish to peruse Talk:Tom Lehrer. — ATinySliver / ATalkPage &#128406; 20:42, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I saw it when I looked in to add the "failed GAN" tag. I agree, as you see, with the view there that the article is nowhere near GAN level yet. I hope someone (you, perhaps?) will bring expertise to bear to bring it up to standard. I much enjoy Lehrer's songs and I was very sad to have to quick-fail the article, but there was no alternative.  Tim riley  talk    20:56, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * That was pretty much the reason I jumped in at talk—I'm a long-time (seriously, I'm old ) Lehrer fan ("Masochism Tango", anyone?). As you no doubt saw, I was thinking, given the exceeding likelihood that this was a drive-by nom, just deleting it rather than failing. Meantime, it's quite possible that I may take on the article someday. — ATinySliver / ATalkPage &#128406; 21:17, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Over the last few weeks, I have been motivated to address nearly all of the concerns raised by this GA review. Although I am relatively new to Wikipedia editing, and I am partially biased by my own (uncited) collaboration with the subject of the article, I believe the "citation needed" qualms have been addressed, partly because there is no dearth of material concerning Mr. Lehrer. I also observe that the basic structure of the article is commendable after many collaborative improvements. So in whatever way a re-review can be commenced, it will have the support of this editor. James Alien Woods (talk) 03:15, 10 April 2017 (UTC)