Talk:Nightride (album)/GA1: Difference between revisions

Line 9: Line 9:

<!– Please add all review comments below this comment, and do not alter what is above. So that the review can be kept within a single section, please do not use level 2 headers (==…==) below to break up the review. Use level 3 (===…===), level 4 and so on. Template:GAN/preload–>

Will review tomorrow. [[User:RedShellMomentum|RedShellMomentum]] [[User talk:RedShellMomentum|☎]] [[Special:Contributions/RedShellMomentum|✎]] 04:16, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Will review now. [[User:RedShellMomentum|Red]][[User talk:RedShellMomentum|Shell]][[User:RedShellMomentum|Momentum]] 03:23, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

”'[[Wikipedia:Good article nominations|GA]] review – see [[WP:WIAGA]] for criteria”’

#Is it ”’well written”’?

#:A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: {{GAList/check|y}}

#::

#:B. It complies with the [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|manual of style]] guidelines for [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section|lead sections]], [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout|layout]], [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch|words to watch]], [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction|fiction]], and [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Embedded lists|list incorporation]]: {{GAList/check|y}}

#::

#Is it ”'[[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]]”’ with ”’no original research”’, as shown by a [[WP:GAN/I#R3|source spot-check]]?

#:A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with [[WP:FNNR|the layout style guideline]]: {{GAList/check|y}}

#::

#:B. [[WP:Reliable sources|Reliable sources]] are [[WP:Inline citation|cited inline]]. All content that [[Wikipedia:Content that could reasonably be challenged|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): {{GAList/check|y}}

#::

#:C. It contains [[Wikipedia:No original research|no original research]]: {{GAList/check|y}}

#::

#:D. It contains no [[Wikipedia:Copyrights|copyright violations]] nor [[Wikipedia:Plagiarism|plagiarism]]: {{GAList/check|y}}

#::

#Is it ”’broad in its coverage”’?

#:A. It addresses the [[Wikipedia:Out of scope|main aspects]] of the topic: {{GAList/check|y}}

#::

#:B. It stays [[Wikipedia:Article size|focused on the topic]] without going into unnecessary detail (see [[Wikipedia:Summary style|summary style]]): {{GAList/check|y}}

#::

#Is it ”'[[WP:NPOV|neutral]]”’?

#:It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: {{GAList/check|}}

#::

#Is it ”’stable”’?

#: It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing [[Wikipedia:Edit war|edit war]] or content dispute: {{GAList/check|y}}

#::

#Is it illustrated, if possible, by ”'[[Wikipedia:Images|images]]”’?

#:A. Images are [[Wikipedia:Copyright tags|tagged]] with their [[Wikipedia:Copyright FAQ|copyright status]], and [[Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline|valid non-free use rationales]] are provided for [[Wikipedia:Non-free content|non-free content]]: {{GAList/check|y}}

#::

#:B. Images are [[WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE|relevant]] to the topic, and have [[Wikipedia:Captions|suitable captions]]: {{GAList/check|y}}

#::

#”’Overall”’:

#:Pass or Fail: {{GAList/check|y}}

#::

{{ping|Camilasdandelions}} Overall, the article looks good, but “Musically, Nightride continues Tinashe’s atmospheric R&B style, with sparse production, layered vocals, and ambient textures.” needs to be trimmed a bit, and also check that “short film” is properly cited. Once those are fixed, I’ll be happy to pass the nomination.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Camilasdandelions (talk · contribs) 00:06, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: RedShellMomentum (talk · contribs) 04:16, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will review tomorrow. RedShellMomentum ☎ ✎ 04:16, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Will review now. Red Shell Momentum 03:23, 12 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?

A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. 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):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?

A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?

It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?

It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:

Pass or Fail:

@Camilasdandelions: Overall, the article looks good, but “Musically, Nightride continues Tinashe’s atmospheric R&B style, with sparse production, layered vocals, and ambient textures.” needs to be trimmed a bit, and also check that “short film” is properly cited. Once those are fixed, I’ll be happy to pass the nomination.

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply