Talk:Jay Som/GA1

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   I spot checked all the citations that appeared in the article. Most of the content in the article represents what was said in those articles, including not having copyright violations and plagiarism. Though, I do have some notes as seen below — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragonhawk12 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. 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):

   C. It contains no original research:

• The sentence "Everybody Works landed on Best of 2017 lists from Pitchfork, NPR, Stereogum, Rolling Stone, Entertainment Weekly and Billboard." does need a citation
• The phrase "In June 2018, Duterte opened for The National at their show in Dublin, Ireland. She also toured with Paramore that same year, and was their opening act for the second half of Tour 5." doesn't seem to be backed up by a source (I have/will mark it with a "Citation needed" tag).
• Please see WP:VERIFYOR and WP:OR

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

1. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

2. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

3. Is it stable?

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

4. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

5. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   I will give some time for the nominator to fix these issues. If the nominator doesn't respond in a reasonable amount of time (2ish weeks) I will fail the article. If you have any questions please feel free to ask! (This is the whole purpose of a review, after all!) (This is also my first GA review, so if I get something wrong or make a mistake please point it out to me) Dragonhawk12 (talk) 22:10, 12 April 2026 (UTC)

   Alright Veyhola (talk) 21:45, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

   Oh wow I only have to fix one thing Veyhola (talk) 21:45, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

   Alright I fixed 2C Veyhola (talk) 22:57, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

   The 12th source doesn't seem like it mentions the tour from "The National". I might be wrong though. Are you able to point to where they are mentioned in the article? If they aren't, please add a source about The National's tour. Dragonhawk12 (talk) (Guestbook) 20:19, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

   Oh that was for Paramore, but I'll add another one Veyhola (talk) 01:39, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

   Ok, it's done now Veyhola (talk) 01:52, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

   I still don't see the part in that source where they mention "The National". Could you point out where it was said? Dragonhawk12 (talk) (Guestbook) 04:10, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Nominator: EternalBaile (talk · contribs) 05:25, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: Dragonhawk12 (talk · contribs) 22:10, 12 April 2026 (UTC)