Talk:The Boys Are Back (The Oak Ridge Boys album)

The Boys Are Back (The Oak Ridge Boys album) was a Music good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 31, 2010	Good article nominee	Not listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on May 31, 2009.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the country music quartet The Oak Ridge Boys reached their highest ranking in 26 years on the Billboard 200 with the release of their 2009 album The Boys Are Back?

Albums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Country music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Country music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to country music 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.Country musicWikipedia:WikiProject Country musicTemplate:WikiProject Country musicCountry music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Boys Are Back (The Oak Ridge Boys album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Novice7 | Talk 03:52, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
It's fine.

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Example:- The lead should summarize the whole article's content. Use of "#" is not encouraged.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
Only 5 sources. The main source is dead too.

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Some contents seem like OR.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Some sentences seem biased.
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
The performance photograph could use a bit more description.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
I'm sorry. This is not definitely GA material. If you feel this is an error, you can ask for reassessment.