Wikipedia:Peer review/The River (Bruce Springsteen album)/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
I've listed this article for peer review because... I'm thinking about an FAC run and I'd like to get feedback beforehand.
Thanks, – zmbro (talk) (cont) 19:27, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
LunaEclipse
[edit]Spotcheck coming in bit.
[87]: 
Source is reliable per WP:RSMUSIC; although some concern would come up due to the RSP entry on AllMusic, you should be fine, as you're using a review to verify information.
[179]: Source is reliable per WP:GOODCHARTS and chart peak is verifiable.
[101]: Source is reliable per WP:ROLLINGSTONE; statement is verifiable.
[169]: Reliable per WP:RSPNME. List placement is accurate.
[181]: Source is reliable per WP:GOODCHARTS and chart peak is verifiable.
[145]: Source is reliable per WP:RSMUSIC. Statements are verifiable
[77]: 
Wasn't there a discussion about Far Out being churnalism?
- LunaEclipse I did a search through the archives of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums and couldn't find a set in stone discussion on whether it's considered reliable or not. I've been noticing editors removing it from certain articles claiming it's unreliable although I've always been uncertain since it's not present on either WP:RSMUSIC nor WP:NOTRSMUSIC. It'd be helpful if that was clarified. But after looking at the article in question's author is doesn't look like he has any prior editing credits at reliable sources so I'll go ahead and remove it. – zmbro (talk) (cont) 21:58, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Zmbro, see this discussion — 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST) 22:02, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ah ok. Thanks. I removed it from the page. LunaEclipse – zmbro (talk) (cont) 22:06, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- Zmbro, see this discussion — 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST) 22:02, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
- LunaEclipse I did a search through the archives of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums and couldn't find a set in stone discussion on whether it's considered reliable or not. I've been noticing editors removing it from certain articles claiming it's unreliable although I've always been uncertain since it's not present on either WP:RSMUSIC nor WP:NOTRSMUSIC. It'd be helpful if that was clarified. But after looking at the article in question's author is doesn't look like he has any prior editing credits at reliable sources so I'll go ahead and remove it. – zmbro (talk) (cont) 21:58, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
[63]: Source is reliable per WP:GUARDIAN. Statements are verifiable.
[67]: Source is reliable per WP:RSMUSIC. Statements are verifiable.
[196]: Source is reliable per WP:GOODCHARTS and certification is verifiable.
[158]: Reliable per WP:RSMUSIC. List placement is accurate.
[122]: Statement is verifiable.
[168]: Reliable per WP:ROLLINGSTONE. List placement is accurate.
💽 LunaEclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST) 22:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)