Talk:Gråt Fader Berg och spela/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 09:26, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

This looks like an interesting article. Based on what I can see of the review of Fram med basfiolen, knäpp och skruva, it may be close to GA already. I will start a review shortly. simongraham (talk) 09:26, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks, and I certainly hope so! Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:43, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Assessment

• The article was created on 12 December and is rated as both a B and C class within different wikiprojects.
  • Noted.
• The article is relatively short, at 802 words of readable prose.
  • Noted.
• The lead is of appropriate length at 122 words.
  • Thanks.
• There are no obvious spelling or grammar errors.
• The publication is not mentioned in the body. I suggest adding a relevant paragraph, possibly after the Lyrics. I note that this is also the case in other articles on songs by this artist. The following facts need to the covered:
  • The date that it was first published.
    • Added.
  • In what publications.
  • That it was No.12.
    • Added.
  • The subtitle.
    • Added.
  • Any further details about the first and subsequent publications.
    • Added.
  • I suggest that the sources in your excellent article Fredmans epistlar should furnish most of this.
    • Indeed.
• It complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead, layout and word choice.
  • Thanks.
• Citations seem comprehensive and from reliable sources.
  • Noted.
• I recommend adding the language= tag to the sources which are not in English.
  • Done.
• There is no evidence of no original research.
  • Noted.
• Earwig's Copyvio Detector detects 0% copywrite violation, which is very impressive.
  • Noted.
• The topic is covered with a neutral point of view.
  • Noted.
• The article is stable, 100% authored by Chiswick Chap.
  • Noted.
• Images are public domain and appropriately tagged.
  • Noted.
• Images have appropriate captions. I recommend adding ALT tags, even though this in not a GA criteria, to the images in the text (the image in the Infobox already has the tag).
  • Noted, and added alt texts.

@Chiswick Chap: Please ping me when you would like me to look again. simongraham (talk) 09:57, 30 January 2022 (UTC) @Simongraham: - I think that's all done now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:41, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: Great work. This article now meets the criteria to be a Good Article.

Pass simongraham (talk) 15:07, 30 January 2022 (UTC)