Talk:Misterioso (Thelonious Monk album)/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 13:37, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

I'll be glad to take this review. Initial comments to follow sometime in the next week. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:37, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Initial comments

This looks like a very solid article and is just about ready for promotion; I've raised only a few quibbles here, which you can find below. Please feel free to revert any of the tweaks I've made to the article as well. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:05, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

• "Monk played piano more vividly than on his studio recordings" -- this seems like an opinion that needs intext atribution
• "It was his first successful live recording after he had tried to record there a month earlier" -- so was it his first successful live recording in the month sense that date? Or was it his first successful live recording ever? The phrasing's a bit ambiguous.
• "Monk played piano more vividly and less introspectively " -- again, I'd suggest citing whose opinion this is intext ("According to Keepnews,") -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:05, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

• Done. Attributed opinion to Keepnews (which has also helps mention him in the lead); the other point was that it was Monk's first successful live recording (in general). Hope the phrasing clears it up. Dan56 (talk) 02:57, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

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.	See minor clarity point above. Spotchecks show no evidence of copyright issues.
	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.	I see that this aspect was controversial in prior review, but FWIW, I agree with the argument of the nominator that "main aspects" are covered.
	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.	See minor point about intext attribution for one claim.
	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