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

Reviewer: Tim riley (talk · contribs) 11:44, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Starting first read-through. More as soon as possible. Tim riley talk 11:44, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This enjoyable article is not yet ready for GA. There are far too many statements that lack citations, and I'm sorry to say it is an immediate fail.

• Academic and military career
  • First paragraph – uncited
  • Third paragraph – has a "citation needed" tag
• Musical career
  • First paragraph – uncited
  • Fourth paragraph – uncited except for the quotation.
  • Fifth paragraph – has a "citation needed" tag
  • Sixth paragraph – has "citation needed" and "speculation tags", and no citations whatever
  • Eight paragraph – no citations
• Revivals and discographic reissues
  • Two uncited paragraphs
• Musical legacy
  • First paragraph – has a "citation needed" tag
  • Second paragraph – citation lacking for Shuch quotation
  • Sixth paragraph – uncited
  • Seventh paragraph – has a "citation needed" tag and is mostly without citations
  • Eighth paragraph – has a "citation needed" tag and is completely without citations

If this problem is systematically addressed it will be worth considering renominating the article for GA. Tim riley talk 12:10, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Tim riley: you may wish to peruse Talk:Tom Lehrer#GAN. —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 🖖 20:42, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I saw it when I looked in to add the "failed GAN" tag. I agree, as you see, with the view there that the article is nowhere near GAN level yet. I hope someone (you, perhaps?) will bring expertise to bear to bring it up to standard. I much enjoy Lehrer's songs and I was very sad to have to quick-fail the article, but there was no alternative. Tim riley talk 20:56, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That was pretty much the reason I jumped in at talk—I'm a long-time (seriously, I'm old ) Lehrer fan ("Masochism Tango", anyone?). As you no doubt saw, I was thinking, given the exceeding likelihood that this was a drive-by nom, just deleting it rather than failing. Meantime, it's quite possible that I may take on the article someday. —ATinySliver/^ATalkPage 🖖 21:17, 30 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Over the last few weeks, I have been motivated to address nearly all of the concerns raised by this GA review. Although I am relatively new to Wikipedia editing, and I am partially biased by my own (uncited) collaboration with the subject of the article, I believe the "citation needed" qualms have been addressed, partly because there is no dearth of material concerning Mr. Lehrer. I also observe that the basic structure of the article is commendable after many collaborative improvements. So in whatever way a re-review can be commenced, it will have the support of this editor. James Alien Woods (talk) 03:15, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]