# Talk:Threni (Stravinsky)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Threni (Stravinsky)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 20:30, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
The lead should be longer. Content from the history, influence and movement section should be summarized in the lead.
Thanks, yes, so it should. I've expanded it to include those things. --Stfg (talk) 14:08, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall: The lead is the only major issue. --GoPTCN 12:34, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Pass/Fail: 

Miss you, Jerome, along with Claudio Spies (1925 – April 2, 2020) who described materials he looked at.
My vocal score (B&H 18445) has the corrections found in the Library of Congress printer's proof. I still doubt whether the much marked up 'measure' 178 (image 22 at LoC) is correct: the tenor has a crochet on the 3rd syllable of "In tenebrosis collo-ca-vit" while the basso comes has a quaver.
Sparafucil (talk) 10:20, 24 February 2021 (UTC)