Talk:Death Is Birth

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Death Is Birth article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Death Is Birth 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
December 29, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: North8000 (talk · contribs) 23:07, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am starting a review of this article. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 23:07, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review comments

If it's hard to do, the current 1 image would be OK, but would it be feasible to add another image? North8000 (talk) 23:11, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In various places it uses wording/ unexplained terms in ways that presumes that the readers already know the material. I will try to point out example but a review in this areas would be good. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 23:19, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Upon closer reading, a bit of an issue, but minor, and not enough to affect the review. North8000 (talk) 13:12, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Final GA criteria checklist

Well-written

Meets this criteria.North8000 (talk) 21:50, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Factually accurate and verifiable

Meets this criteria. Suggestion: the two "bibliography" items were not cited in the article. Suggest using them in that way. North8000 (talk) 15:11, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Broad in its coverage

Meets this criteria, considering that its subject matter is an album. North8000 (talk) 21:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each

Meets this criteria. North8000 (talk) 21:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute

Meets this criteria. North8000 (talk) 21:59, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrated, if possible, by images

Meets this criteria. Has two images; the one non-free image has an article-specific use rationale. North8000 (talk) 21:58, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article passe Good Article! Congratulations! I will implement the details shortly. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:00, 29 December 2012 (UTC) Reviewer[reply]

This article has passed as a Wikipedia Good Article

This article has passed as a Wikipedia Good Article. I have "duplicated" this here for when the review page is no longer transcluded. Congratulations! Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:10, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]