Talk:Gravitational Forces

Fair use rationale for Image:REK Gravitational Forces.jpg

Image:REK Gravitational Forces.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 00:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Gravitational Forces/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

While the article does not list musicians in a "personnel" section as set out at Wikipedia:ALBUM#Personnel, it does include that information elsewhere, though, so by WP:IAR this should pass at least as "C". Given a guideline-compliant "personnel" section, this article wound, in my opinion, meet the "B" standard, although for higher assessment it might also need some layout work to conform to overall manual of style guidelines, and it has too many reviews in the infobox—as the project guidelines indicate, reviews should be limited to 10. The lead should operate as a concise summary of other sections, and it seems likely that some of the material there could be moved to other sections within the body, perhaps in a critical response section. The article is certainly very well sourced. Nicely done! Article requirements: Y Start: reasonably complete infobox; lead section with overview of album; track listing; reference to at least primary personnel by name; Categorization by at least artist and year. Y C: all of start and (1) cover art in infobox; (2) at least one additional section of prose; (3) track lengths & song authors in tracklist; (4) a personnel section including all musicians. B: all of C and (1) most technical details in infobox; (2) technical personnel in personnel section; (3) no obvious issues with sourcing; (4) no obvious issues with readability, though it may not conform completely to style guidelines; (5) no glaring omissions of information (see some suggestions at WP:ALBUM) or extraneous information, like trivia. Higher Classes are not assigned by WikiProject Album. Please review "the perfect article" and, if already B class, consider seeking additional feedback from Wikipedia:Good articles or Wikipedia:Featured articles. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Assessment for additional information on article class. To request a reassessment from the Album project, when concerns are addressed, please see "requesting an assessment". --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 19:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 16:37, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gravitational Forces. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061129014201/http://www.performingsongwriter.com/pages/home/shawn_2.cfm to http://www.performingsongwriter.com/pages/home/shawn_2.cfm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070616182423/http://kgsr.com/broadcasts/index10.aspx to http://kgsr.com/broadcasts/index10.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:42, 6 January 2018 (UTC)