Talk:Still Reigning

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Still Reigning article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	Still Reigning is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Article milestones Date Process Result February 16, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed February 19, 2007 Peer review Reviewed March 26, 2007 Good article reassessment Listed June 28, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted Current Status: Featured article

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

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. FA This article has been rated as FA-class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Slayer, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Slayer. If you would like to participate please visit the project page. FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the assessment scale. Heavy metal Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metal, an attempt to improve articles related to heavy metal music. Please participate by visiting the project page for more details on the projects. FA This article has been rated as FA-class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] Failed GA

This article won't meet GA standards until you provide a source (preferably inline) on every statement. If this is already met, I apologize for the misconception, and will pass it. If not, fix it, relist it, and it'll probably be passed. DoomsDay349 01:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Got your message on my talk page. So, you're saying that in a paragraph where two statements appear, the reference covers them both? If so, I will be glad to reverse my decision and pass the article. DoomsDay349 20:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you can check the references to verify if you want. M3tal H3ad 00:59, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Failed (again)

Please try making the necessary improvements to the article and waiting, this article (as it seems above) has been repeatedly nominated in the past month. The article will not pass unless the following changes are made and any others

1. This article needs some expansion, however only expand it if the info is worth it, if its not relevant info in which you are adding, ignore this
2. Cite all your sources and format them properly, there are about three number 1's and three number 2's.
3. Try not to repeat information (eg it was recorded at ?? centre in 2004), its highly annoying and this could stop it from passing in future.
4. Add the relevant interwiki links to it, such as on dates etc (see [Wikipedia:Wikify|Wikify]]). Please consider being patient and waiting, repeatedly nominating it will just make it look like the article or nominator is desperate for it to become a good article. Thanks.Tellyaddict 22:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

1. It either needs expansion or it doesn't. Is it as comprehensive as one would demand of a Good Article? It could probably use a little more on context and critical reception but I don't see any glaring omissions.
2. If they're from the same source they share a number. Refs look fine to me in that regard. Some of the sources look a little less than hot but this isn't an FAC.
3. See WP:LEAD. The lead should summarise the article. If they tell us in the lead it was recorded in 2004, they should tell us the same in the body - just with more detail.
4. What links in particular are missing?

Now, I've never seen this video, don't listen to this band, and I'm not saying this should or shouldn't be a GA. I just see a bit of a shortage of informed reviewing going on here. --kingboyk 01:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Kingboyk - the discussion has been resumed at Good Article Review. LuciferMorgan 20:12, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

• Many dates wikilinked unnecessarily; this is distracting.
• Still needs more copyediting for grammar/punct. etc. though I made a first pass at it.
• Why no mention in the lead of the awards the video received?
• Any controversy? Anyone saying that it represents a decline in moral values of modern society etc etc etc blah blah blah?
• Will look again later.
• --Ling.Nut 21:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

• All full dates are linked properly per WP:DATE, and shouldn't be delinked.
• Obviously, heavy metal is controversial for that all the time, however this video has no specific controversy. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:06, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

• I didn't say the dates were improperly linked; I said there was absolutely no reason to link to them. But "As you wish." :-)
• I emailed some stuff to LuciferMorgan that may be useful for this article. --Ling.Nut 16:10, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Those emails are now in the possession of M3tal H3ad, the primary author of the article. LuciferMorgan 10:45, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

• OK, if I find anything else on this particular topic, I'll email it to M3tal H3ad. Good luck with the article! --Ling.Nut 13:49, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:HannemanRainingblood.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:HannemanRainingblood.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Papa November (talk) 15:04, 15 January 2008 (UTC)