Jump to content
Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia

Talk:John Koerner

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articles John Koerner has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review : November 18, 2024. (Reviewed version ).
In the news A news item involving John Koerner was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 21 May 2024 .
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject icon Biography : Musicians
WikiProject icon 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
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Low-importance).
WikiProject icon Minnesota
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota , a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Removed

[edit ]

I removed the following sentence from this article as unencylopedic and unclear: "Has been known to enjoy a shot of brandy with a beer back in Palmers once and a while." Please replace if you disagree. Dina 20:21, 19 August 2006 (UTC) [reply ]

Fair use rationale for Image:Spider John Koerner.jpg

[edit ]

Image:Spider John Koerner.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC) [reply ]

Death

[edit ]

He died of bile duct cancer according to this article: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2024/05/18/musician-spider-john-koerner-dies-at-85

GA Review

[edit ]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:John Koerner/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Mehendri Solon (talk · contribs) 21:29, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Reviewer: Sir MemeGod (talk · contribs) 12:34, 25 October 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Hi, I will be reveiwing this momentarily. Apologies in advance if I do mess something up, I am also relatively new to the process. Sir MemeGod 12:34, 25 October 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

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:
    See below.
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    Good here, although I would suggest emphasizing on who Ian Anderson is in the lede.
  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:
    The only issue is that a "Bibliography" section with sources is missing, if you need help with this feel free to ask. Also see below for an example.
    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):
    All sources appear to be reliable, "Allmusic" is marginally reliable but should be fine here.
    C. It contains no original research:
    "and with Glover on the concert album Live @ The 400 Bar in 2009." is missing a source.
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
    A 66.5% copyvio ratio is found with RecordCollectorMag, although it appears to be properly-cited quotes.
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    No issues.
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
    No issues here either.
  4. Is it neutral ?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
    Seems to be fine after a read-over.
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
    No recent edit warring or major changes.
  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:
    Both pieces of media are taken by users, so the licensing is proper.
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
    No issues.
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    A few issues need cleared up.


Bibliography example

[edit ]

Sources

[edit ]

For the prose issue, I suggest adding a "{{clear}}" template at the end of the "Awards and recognition" so that the image doesn't cut off the next header. Same with the "Music career" section. Pinging nominator @Mehendri Solon:. :) Sir MemeGod 12:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Thank you. I will get to work on making those improvements. Mehendri Solon (talk) 14:54, 25 October 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
@Mehendri Solon, @Sir MemeGod, reminder ping (checking in because the backlog drive has finished). -- asilvering (talk) 23:53, 3 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
Thank you for the reminder. I have not forgotten about this but I have been busy with work projects and have not been able to devote the necessary time, but I intend to return to this as soon as I can. Mehendri Solon (talk) 08:57, 4 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
Okay, thank you. It's fine if the nom runs for a little longer, but after a certain point it may fails for inactivity reasons. :) Sir MemeGod chat 17:13, 4 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
@EF5, @Mehendri Solon, this review should probably be wrapped up or closed for inactivity in the next couple days. —Ganesha811 (talk) 23:02, 17 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
Understood, thank you. I will do what I can to move it forward ASAP. Sorry for the delay. Mehendri Solon (talk) 23:04, 17 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
Please have a look at the article when you have a chance. I believe I have addressed all the questions raised. I am not at all sure if I've formatted the Sources section correctly, but I did my best and would appreciate guidance on making it better. Mehendri Solon (talk) 06:12, 18 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
Looks much better. The sources section usually goes under the references, but I have fixed that as it isn't really a big deal. Great job! E F 5 14:04, 18 November 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /