Talk:No Doubt (No Doubt album)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the No Doubt (No Doubt album) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

No Doubt (No Doubt album) 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 17, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
October 19, 2009	Featured topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

Albums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Alternative music Low‑importance

	Rock music portal 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.

Gwen Stefani Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gwen Stefani, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gwen Stefani 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.Gwen StefaniWikipedia:WikiProject Gwen StefaniTemplate:WikiProject Gwen StefaniGwen Stefani articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Reggae Mid‑importance

	This article is part of the Reggae WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the coverage of articles relating to ska and reggae. 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.ReggaeWikipedia:WikiProject ReggaeTemplate:WikiProject ReggaeReggae articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Music

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in 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.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Something

Well I've finished writing this article for now. It's a hell of a lot longer than it was - before I started it consisted of an infobox, one sentence, and a Personnel and Production section. Anyway, I know my writing style isn't that nice, so if anyone feels like re-writing it, go ahead! I've kinda come to the conclusion that there's no way this article could become featured, which was my original aim - I don't think it's significant enough. But anyway, all I can do is my best. Terrafire 22:18, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews

I'm trying to get this to Good Article status but I'm having major difficulties find reviews of the album. I have allmusic and - after a long search - Piero Scaruffi. The album was so insignificant very few people reviewed it. If anyone could find a review, please add it or contact me. -- _{Escape Artist Swyer} ^{Talk to me} _{The mess I've made} 19:22, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. :) I'd like to suggest you give a shot at googlebooks. No Doubt didn't make it easy by releasing a self-titled debut (and having a "common phrase" name!), but a search of "No Doubt" + Stefani + 1992, did find me a few things. I got this, for instance. And this. The former is a review. The latter may be mined for more information.

If you haven't worked with googlebooks before, the thing to look for is the words "limited preview", which means you can read some of it. You can get all the information you need except "page number" from the link to the side that says "more about this book". The page number, of course, comes from the main screen. So does the URL, obviously. Truly, googlebooks can be a goldmine. Good luck! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:18, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The relevent info from the latter link is blantantly ripped from the band's official timeline so I already have it. I'll hunt around Googlebooks though. Thanks for the advice. -- _{Escape Artist Swyer} ^{Talk to me} _{The mess I've made} 21:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article is pretty good anyway. I'll list at at WP:GAC as soon as the AfD for Trapped in a Box is over. -- _{Escape Artist Swyer} ^{Talk to me} _{The mess I've made} 13:52, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

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

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:
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):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
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:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

It passed. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 12:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:TrappedInABox.ogg

The image Image:TrappedInABox.ogg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --17:14, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:No Doubt (No Doubt album)/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 →

Pretty good, just keep adding info. Google search and try to pull sources for the figures, etc. Violask81976 03:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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".

To meet the more rigorous criteria of the revised B class, this article needs improved sourcing to help readers verify the accuracy of information. The "background" section offers no sourcing at all. "Lead" sections, which are meant to summarize the article, often do not require inline citations at all, but unique information presented there does. The lead currently says, "During their career No Doubt have experimented with many differing musical styles, playing a major role in the third wave ska revival, but their first album is generally considered to be a ska punk album, albeit with New Wave influences unusual for the genre." Who says this? Where can readers go to verify this?

Additional information about the album, particularly its music, might also be helpful. Please see WP:ALBUM for ideas for additional information to include.

Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Assessment for additional information on B class in album articles. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 11:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 03:16, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on No Doubt (No Doubt album). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 13:17, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on No Doubt (No Doubt album). 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 08:16, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]