![]() | Grandaddy has been listed as one of the
Music good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: October 24, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
i can see there's some real fans of grandaddy out there - but i think the hyperbole could be lost from the article
I am not too familiar with the Wikipedia style guide, but I get the feeling this article would look and read a lot better if we got rid of the huge logo, downsized the band photo, and had all the discography on one page. It's not warranted splitting up such a short article over several sections. Galaga88 14:23, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
"The feeling at the meeting was described by Lytle as the result of a breakdown in communication between the band members" - is the band simply the members as a whole? Conflicted individuals...
Awesome random notes, Mr. anonymous. Burn my bridge for me. Sleepy_boy_on_the_tracks
One of the "Split Singles," Alan Parsons... is not in fact split, and that article mistakenly says that it is a non-album single. In fact, it was released on the It's a Cool Cool Christmas Compilation. Additionally, the "compilations" section puts all bootlegs in there, which aren't really compilations. - Zeichman —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zeichman ( talk • contribs) 02:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC).
Image:Grandaddyphotoshoot.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
The linked word 'indietronic' just links to the electronic music, which doesn't mention 'indietronic' as far as I can see. -- Notquitethere ( talk) 13:36, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
A moderate amount of the article Alan Parsons in a Winter Wonderland should be merged into this article at which point the former article should be replaced with a redirect. The most important section from "Reception" that should be merged is the quote from Scott Miller as that is the only review that specifically relates to Grandaddy. Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:56, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
If anyone fancies improving the articles in this area, the Grandaddy discography article should ideally be expanded to include fuller details of the releases - labels, dates, tracklistings etc. This would eventually adequately replace a lot of the shorter articles on the band's singles. When that's done, we can see what information we have left and determine what is best to do with it. And please, people, consider merging and/or redirecting as options WP:BEFORE taking these articles to AFD.-- Michig ( talk) 21:03, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
I have expanded the It's a Cool Cool Christmas article to include most of the content from the Alan Parsons article. I would suggest that redirecting there might now be the best option.-- Michig ( talk) 17:53, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Khazar2 ( talk · contribs) 12:42, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Lachlan, I'll be glad to take this one; sorry you've had to wait so long for a reviewer. Comments to follow in the next 1-3 days. Thanks in advance for all your work! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 12:42, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
On first pass, this looks quite good for prose/sourcing/neutrality. In particular, the prose is clean and readable compared to a lot of nominations I've been reviewing this week! Thanks again for your work on it. Just a few small questions/action points so far. Next I'll do source and image review.
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | Pass as GA |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 40 external links on Grandaddy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:10, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
![]() | Grandaddy has been listed as one of the
Music good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: October 24, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
i can see there's some real fans of grandaddy out there - but i think the hyperbole could be lost from the article
I am not too familiar with the Wikipedia style guide, but I get the feeling this article would look and read a lot better if we got rid of the huge logo, downsized the band photo, and had all the discography on one page. It's not warranted splitting up such a short article over several sections. Galaga88 14:23, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
"The feeling at the meeting was described by Lytle as the result of a breakdown in communication between the band members" - is the band simply the members as a whole? Conflicted individuals...
Awesome random notes, Mr. anonymous. Burn my bridge for me. Sleepy_boy_on_the_tracks
One of the "Split Singles," Alan Parsons... is not in fact split, and that article mistakenly says that it is a non-album single. In fact, it was released on the It's a Cool Cool Christmas Compilation. Additionally, the "compilations" section puts all bootlegs in there, which aren't really compilations. - Zeichman —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zeichman ( talk • contribs) 02:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC).
Image:Grandaddyphotoshoot.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
The linked word 'indietronic' just links to the electronic music, which doesn't mention 'indietronic' as far as I can see. -- Notquitethere ( talk) 13:36, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
A moderate amount of the article Alan Parsons in a Winter Wonderland should be merged into this article at which point the former article should be replaced with a redirect. The most important section from "Reception" that should be merged is the quote from Scott Miller as that is the only review that specifically relates to Grandaddy. Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:56, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
If anyone fancies improving the articles in this area, the Grandaddy discography article should ideally be expanded to include fuller details of the releases - labels, dates, tracklistings etc. This would eventually adequately replace a lot of the shorter articles on the band's singles. When that's done, we can see what information we have left and determine what is best to do with it. And please, people, consider merging and/or redirecting as options WP:BEFORE taking these articles to AFD.-- Michig ( talk) 21:03, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
I have expanded the It's a Cool Cool Christmas article to include most of the content from the Alan Parsons article. I would suggest that redirecting there might now be the best option.-- Michig ( talk) 17:53, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Khazar2 ( talk · contribs) 12:42, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Lachlan, I'll be glad to take this one; sorry you've had to wait so long for a reviewer. Comments to follow in the next 1-3 days. Thanks in advance for all your work! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 12:42, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
On first pass, this looks quite good for prose/sourcing/neutrality. In particular, the prose is clean and readable compared to a lot of nominations I've been reviewing this week! Thanks again for your work on it. Just a few small questions/action points so far. Next I'll do source and image review.
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | Pass as GA |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 40 external links on Grandaddy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:10, 24 March 2017 (UTC)