Jump to content

Talk:Taking Chances

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeTaking Chances 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
DateProcessResult
June 30, 2011Good article nomineeNot listed

Page "Taking Chances" as a disambig page, or not?

[edit]
No, it should not be a disambig page because only two things are known as Taking Chances, the album and title track. If something else were to have a title by that name, such as a novel, movie, or play, or if it were two albums by different artists, then the disambig would be appropriate. Admc2006 16:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, according to Wikipedia:Disambiguation you should ask yourself: when a reader enters a given term in the Wikipedia search box and pushes "Go", what article would they most likely be expecting to view as a result? You can't say that it's the album for sure. It can be the leading single as well. So when there is risk of confusion, the page for an ambiguous term should have a way to take the reader to any of the reasonable possibilities for that term. Max24 19:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Album information" section

[edit]

This section should be better organised as it merely enumerates facts in a bulletd list. Tomj (talk) 02:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chart Performance

[edit]

Should the Taking Chances Chart Performance Section be sorted by peak position (not alphabetical order by country) in the same way that all her other albums were sorted? I spent ages sorting it this way and someone undid the changes I made so I was wondering what people thought about this. Sg2002 (talk) 11:11, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Taking Chances/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 23:15, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Id say about 90% of the article is WP:OR
  • MOS violation everywhere; WP:MOS#NUMBERS WP:MOS#ITALICS, WP:MOS#DATE and many more violations.
  • WP:LEAD lacks structure, flow and clarity. No references in the lead please.
  • Overall weak prose lacking proper structure, grammar, and punctuation.
  • Unreliable references, unformatted references ect ect...

9 edits were made to this article and no effort was put into it. Its far from GA. I think this is the 4th article ive failed from you, stop nominating them please. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 23:15, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]