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?

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

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. 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):

4. Is it neutral?

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

5. Is it stable?

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

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

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

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

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Pass

• Has an appropriate reference section. SilkTork (talk) 18:56, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Stable. No edit wars, but article suffers from a high level of vandalism and inappropriate edits. Possibly needs semi-protecting. SilkTork (talk) 18:58, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Media has appropriate copyright tags. SilkTork (talk) 19:08, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• No obvious copyvio found. SilkTork (talk) 19:33, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Query

• There are a number of dubious quality images of the band live which may not comply with WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE. There is a media clip which does not have a rationale for use in this article, and it's use here is unclear. SilkTork (talk) 19:08, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Prose is clunky and unhelpful, it doesn't flow. This is possibly a fail. SilkTork (talk) 19:23, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• The Activism and philanthropy section seems a little excessive and promotional, giving undue weight to minor matters. A number of statements are unsourced, such as "While "A Dustland Fairytale" was written as a tribute to frontman Brandon Flowers' parents, his mother had recently been diagnosed with terminal cancer", making it difficult to assess neutrality and original research. SilkTork (talk) 04:49, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fail

• Lead. To meet GA criteria 1(b), which relates to specific manual of style guidelines, the article needs to comply with the advice in WP:LEAD. That is, in addition to being an introduction, the lead needs to be an adequate overview of the whole of the article. As a rough guide, each major section in the article should be represented with an appropriate summary in the lead. Also, the article should provide further details on all the things mentioned in the lead. And, the first few sentences should mention the most notable features of the article's subject - the essential facts that every reader should know. SilkTork (talk) 19:13, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Has been tagged as needing citation since January 2019. A number of challengeable statements, such as "In the same month, the band's Tim Burton-directed video for the album's second single, "Bones", won Best Video at the NME Awards", need citation to reliable sources. SilkTork (talk) 19:19, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Broad coverage. The Musical style section does not explain adequately or appropriately the musicianship of the band, what form of music they play, if they are musically original or derivative, what their influences are, or who they have influenced in turn. Are any of the members of the band known for their musical talent? Do any of them have notable or named instruments? SilkTork (talk) 04:53, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• This was listed as a GA 11 years ago, and it looks like it hasn't been well maintained, so I'm taking a closer look. SilkTork (talk) 18:46, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Some links, such as the tours, return here. SilkTork (talk) 19:10, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• The "Musical style" section is simply a list. This needs explaining for readers. SilkTork (talk) 19:25, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• The "Official members timeline" appears to be pointless. SilkTork (talk) 19:27, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• The article was listed as a Good Article 11 years ago, but doesn't meet current GA standards. Mainly, it lacks inline citations to reliable sources, though there are a number of other issues which indicate that the article would benefit from a thorough copyedit and rebuild. The lead in particular needs work, as does the Musical style section. I will notify significant contributors and related projects, and put this on hold for seven days to see what happens. SilkTork (talk) 04:56, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My involvement with this article has been sporadic over the years, but I was notified of this nomination. My area of expertise is references, so I'll do what I can to bring them up to speed.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 01:33, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your contributions Esprit15d, though I'm now having to close this as delist as there has been no work from anyone since Nov 25th, and the article is still tagged as needing sources. SilkTork (talk) 11:24, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I completely understand.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 18:51, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]