Talk:I Still See Your Face

I Still See Your Face was a Music good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. 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
October 31, 2020	Guild of Copy Editors	Copyedited
October 31, 2020	Peer review	Reviewed
November 6, 2020	Good article nominee	Not listed

Current status: Former good article nominee

Electronic music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic music 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.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Netherlands

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:I Still See Your Face/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 18:44, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Short article that won't take too long; will start reviewing today or tomorrow. --K. Peake 18:44, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quick fail[edit]

Sorry I have to do this, I was going to go through in full when I initially noticed the issues because I thought they would be minor; however, this article is way too far from being broad in its coverage. There is a lack of sources to indicate this, with many coming from YouTube and Twitter alongside unreliable ones such as Highclouds.org and Spotify. On top of this, the lead is poorly written with info being crammed together like in the last sentence and things are not organised well in the body that also shows a lack of broadness with only two sections of prose. ✗ Fail time now. --K. Peake 09:41, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]