Talk:No Age

	No Age was one of the Music good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. 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 Date Process Result September 28, 2008 Good article nominee Listed August 21, 2015 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Musicians This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Low-importance). Alternative music Low‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This review is transcluded from Talk:No Age/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   The lead seems very short and it would be best to summarize the entire article, per here. Worked on lead..User:EnjoiNico In the Formation, EPs, and Weirdo Rippers section, spell out "LA". In the Sub Pop, Touring, and Nouns section, this sentence ---> "No On May 6th, 2008, No Age released their debut record for Sub Pop, Nouns", something is very wrong with it. In the Nouns Videos Through Current section, "The music video for No Age's song "Eraser" debuted on June 27 on Pete Wentz' friday night show on MTV", I think Pete Went'z show has a name and it would be best to add the shows name, then just adding "his friday night show". All done. BobAmnertiopsis∴_ChatMe! 03:28, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:33, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   Dates need to be un-linked, per here. In the Formation, EPs, and Weirdo Rippers section, it would be best if "EP", "singles", and "Weirdo Rippers", were linked once, per here. Same section, italicize "Flaunt", "New Yorker", and "Weirdo Ripper", per here. Same section, the link to "label" needs to be corrected. In the Sub Pop, Touring, and Nouns section, link "Liars", "Pitchfork Media", and "Sub Pop" just once. Same section, italicize "Nouns" and "Mojo" and fix "May 6th, 2008" to ---> "May 6, 2008". In the Nouns Videos Through Current section, fix the link to "St. Vincent". Same section, italicize "Nouns" and "Dead Plane". All done. Yay! One more thing to go! BobAmnertiopsis∴_ChatMe! 03:30, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:17, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

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

   It would be best if the references use the {{cite web}} format. Reference 4 needs to be fixed. References 4, 9, 11, 13, 21, 23, 24, 26, and 27 are missing Publisher info. Done! BobAmnertiopsis∴_ChatMe! 00:10, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 07:23, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   B. 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):

   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 non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   Image:NoAgeEraserVideo.jpg is missing info. in the FUR. All done. BobAmnertiopsis∴_ChatMe! 03:29, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:33, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to Bob for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 07:23, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]