Talk:Riskykidd

Latest comment: 11 months ago by TompaDompa in topic GA Review
Former good article nomineeRiskykidd 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
DateProcessResult
November 8, 2023Peer reviewReviewed
December 8, 2023Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Discography

edit

Should we move the discography to its own page or just put it into tables here? Thoughts?

Ktkvtsh (talk) 08:47, 24 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

If better formatted, it could be moved to a separate article.--BabbaQ (talk) 09:49, 24 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
Noted. I will continue working on it in my sandbox Ktkvtsh (talk) 09:50, 24 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Discography moved

edit

The discography for Riskykidd has been moved to Riskykidd discography

Ktkvtsh (talk) 06:05, 25 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Proposed merge of Riskykidd discography into Riskykidd

edit
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Boldly merged by Ktkvtsh. TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:48, 9 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

This discography article fails WP:NLIST on its own with national charts as the only sources. TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:00, 6 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

I see Ktkvtsh has gone ahead and performed the merge. Not much else to do here, closing. TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:46, 9 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA nom

edit

Hi @Ktkvtsh: I'm not so sure that this article is ready for GA. It's rather short (278 words) and a vast majority of the body is missing references to reliable sources. From my experience, 800 words is usually the minimum, though there is no hard cut off. The criteria for good articles can be seen here. I think this currently fails criterion 2 and 3. Two for the missing sources, and 3 because it doesn't go into enough detail about the activities. For example, I'm surprised that Eurovision, which is probably his most impactful endeavor, only consists of one sentence. Luckily there are many many articles out there about the Eurovision participation and from what I've seen, they typically include tidbits of bio that would be great to add here. Grk1011 (talk) 13:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Seconding what Grk1011 said. I'll also note that the article has been concurrently brought to peer review, which I noticed yesterday while closing the merge discussion. I'm active at PR every now and then, and would be happy to provide comments for improvement over there. Since the article in its current state will most likely be quick-failed by a GA reviewer, I'd recommend that you withdraw the nomination, Ktkvtsh, and focus on broadening the scope of the article at PR. TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 14:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thank you. I will go withdraw that now. -- Ktkvtsh (talk) 19:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your notes. This is exactly what I needed to know. -- Ktkvtsh (talk) 19:43, 9 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Hi @Ktkvtsh: I just gave this a once-over since I saw the alert that it had been nominated. There are many sentences with no references that you might want to pre-emptively address before someone takes on the review. If you look back at the peer review, I'm not sure if any of the comments from Z1720 were addressed. Grk1011 (talk) 14:41, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


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

Reviewer: TompaDompa (talk · contribs) 16:08, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

This is a WP:QUICKFAIL based on criterion 3 (It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include {{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags.) and criterion 1 (It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria), specifically WP:GACR 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)). The current version has significant amounts of unsourced material, including the entire discography section. This is especially serious as this is a WP:Biography of a living person. I'll add some maintenance tags to the article itself. It also seems dubious that the current version, at 442 words of readable prose, meets the broadness criterion (WP:GACR 3).

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.