Talk:Boys in the Sand

message: It was a tough call failing this article.  However, there are a couple of serious defects which need to be addressed.  They could not be reasonably improved immediately to bring it up to GA status, which is why I voted for failure.  As I see them, the issues are:
#While generally well-written, the article's tone is not that of a written encyclopedia.  This is not a major problem, but needs to be addressed.  (Example:  Use of the word "stripe" in the lead.)
#The article's references do not comply with Wikipedia's manual of style guidelines.
#The article lacks references. For example, Wakefield Poole's autobiography is never cited, yet brings major insight to bear on this topic. Casey Donovan's interviews are not cited, nor is the major Manshots magazine piece by Jerry Douglas referenced. Additionally, secondary sources are used repeatedly (e.g., the Rutledge citation) when primary sources (e.g., "Variety" for the box office receipts) should be cited.
#The "citing sources" guideline is that whether using embedded links, Harvard referencing or footnotes, "A full citation is also required in a References section at the end of the article." Full citations are provide in the inline footnotes, but should also be provided at the end in a separate section.  Additionally, the Poole interview, which is not used in the article, should be provided for in a "See Also" section.
#Citations for the three direct quotations are lacking.
#There is no citation to the strong claim that Donovan engaged in an "unprecedented pre-release publicity campaign..." This is controversial and challengeable, and needs to be supported.
#The infobox is incomplete, lacking links to the Internet Adult Film Database (IAFD) and the Adult Film Database (AFDB). Citations should be included in the infobox.
This was a difficult call, but this article could easily be brought up to GA status. - Tim1965 (talk) 16:06, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment on GA failure 

message: Here's some friendly advice: The people who review articles know what they're doing, so I would suggest just doing what they ask. Writing reams of notes about your opinions doesn't help. I have done a few GA articles, and I have found life is a lot easier this way. I wish you, and the article, the best. :)--andreasegde (talk) 19:19, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *Thank you, but I have found the opposite to be true. GAC is as much a collaborative effort as any other editing task, and if I don't understand an aspect of a review it doesn't really help the colloboration if I don't ask questions about it. Otto4711 (talk) 20:03, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Advice

message: Either way, this nomination HAS to move along. After looking at all of the improvements and suggestions, the article hasn't been improved enough to be a GA. I am failing this article as many other articles need to be reviewed, and this one is taking up to much time.Limetolime (talk) 20:29, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA fail 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Boys in the Sand. 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/20140131043139/http://www.therialtoreport.com/2013/06/16/wakefield-poole-theater-dance-and-pornpodcast-14/ to http://www.therialtoreport.com/2013/06/16/wakefield-poole-theater-dance-and-pornpodcast-14/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140131043139/http://www.therialtoreport.com/2013/06/16/wakefield-poole-theater-dance-and-pornpodcast-14/ to http://www.therialtoreport.com/2013/06/16/wakefield-poole-theater-dance-and-pornpodcast-14/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:33, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified