Talk:Surfacing (album)

Surfacing (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
July 30, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

Canada: Music Mid‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian music.

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

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.

Billboard charts should be added[edit]

I think the Billboard charts should be added for the singles off this album. Since most of the album pages have their charts listed, I think Surfacing and Afterglow should too. --KelisFan2K5 03:21, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Taking this page off the NeedsInfobox list.

"Adia"[edit]

Even though this song was a hit, I can't find any information on it, even purely stastitical info (like how long it was on the charts). I probably just don't know where to look. But since this song was a single and a hit, it deserves an article.

Apart from a purely stastical viewpoint, a few sentences describing what the song is about would be desirable. But I can't find this information either. After listening to the song several times, I can't think that it refers to anything other than a failed lesbian relationship (because it is sung by a female, and "Adia" is a female name). But putting this in an article without any way to verify it would be pure speculation and perhaps even original research. Does anyone have any more information on the meaning of this song? — Frecklefoot | Talk 22:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Sarahmclachlansurfacing.PNG[edit]

Image:Sarahmclachlansurfacing.PNG 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Surfacing (album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 20:05, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

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

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
In the Recording and release section, "The album was released July 15, 1997 on Nettwerk" ---> "The album was released July 15, 1997, on Nettwerk", commas after dates, if using MDY. Same section, "'Sweet Surrender' was released March 10, 1998 and reached No. 2" ---> "'Sweet Surrender' was released March 10, 1998, and reached No. 2". In the Critical section, "...between her Lilith Fair counterpalooza and "Building a Mystery" bonanza, [he] had to dive in, and got less than [he'd] bargained for" ---> "...between her Lilith Fair counterpalooza and 'Building a Mystery' bonanza, [he] had to dive in, and got less than [he'd] bargained for", the quote shouldn't have quotation marks within quotations, per here.
Check.
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:
Not that much to do. If the above can be dealt with, I will pass the article. Good luck!

-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 20:05, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I believe I have addressed the three issues.--Beloved Freak 20:12, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have, thanks for getting them, cause I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 20:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Surfacing (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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081025104607/http://music.ign.com/articles/691/691277p1.html to http://music.ign.com/articles/691/691277p1.html

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) 13:28, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]