Talk:Fader Bergström

Fader Bergström 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 18, 2022	Good article nominee	Listed

Classical music

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music articles

Sweden Low‑importance

	Sweden portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Fader Bergström/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 07:13, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

I will review this one today! --K. Peake 07:13, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:50, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead[edit]

Infobox looks good!
- Thanks.
Remove the best-known and best-loved songs part, as that is not sourced
- Done.
Add a sentence ending the lead about the reception/legacy of the composition
- Done.

Context[edit]

Good
- Thanks.

Song[edit]

Music and verse form[edit]

Add relevant text to the audio sample to justify usage
- Added.
Pipe 3/4 time to Triple metre
- Done.

Lyrics[edit]

Pipe Fredman to Jean Fredman
- Done.

Reception[edit]

Retitle to Reception and legacy
- Done.
"before the Chancellor of Justice. Fortunately" → "before the Chancellor of Justice and fortunately,"

^* Done.

Are you sure unbridled is an appropriate term here?
- Said 'unrestrained' instead. Means the same thing.
Pipe street-girls to Prostitution
- Done.
Add the release year of Glimmande nymf
- Added.
Imgs look good!!
- Thanks.

References[edit]

Copyvio score looks quite good at 31.5%!
- Noted.
Should ref 13 be cited in place of ref 8 since it includes p. 149?
- Merged refs.
Remove or replace ref 16 per WP:RSPYT
- Removed.

Sources[edit]

Wikilink as Albert Bonniers Förlag instead
- Done.

External links[edit]

Good
- Thanks.

Final comments and verdict[edit]

On hold until all of the issues are fixed! --K. Peake 07:36, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Done all those, thanks for the review. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:01, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chiswick Chap Nice work on this, but you still need to fix the Chanceller prose in reception since those sentences are too short to be on their own. --K. Peake 20:47, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 21:17, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Pass now, thanks for fixing everything so quickly! --K. Peake 07:02, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]