Talk:The Hillbilly Thomists
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Did you know nomination
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 16:20, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
The Hillbilly Thomists
- ... that the Hillbilly Thomists (pictured), a band made up of friars from the Dominican Order, reached the number two spot on Billboard's bluegrass chart?
Pbritti (talk) 12:50, 30 September 2024 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px. |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
I’m not at all an experienced reviewer (or editor for that matter) but I believe I understand the DYK criteria well rn to try and help out with the backlog, so if anyone else has comments or if I did something wrong by all means please bring them up! I’d like to particularly request a second opinion on the image licensing (since I’m not sure how having people in a self work affects things). PixDeVl yell talk to me! 16:10, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- @PixDeVl: Leads do not require citations (see WP:LEADCITE). Also, you can definitely use images of other people if they're not copyright violations. Let me know if you have any questions! ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:15, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- PS: remember to post
{{subst:DYKproblem|[Name of article]|header=yes|sig=yes}}on the relevant user's talk page when you review a hook and don't pass it. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:19, 1 October 2024 (UTC)- @Pbritti:
Fixed the lead part, someone on the Discord also mentioned WP:LEADCITE, so thank you both, I'll keep it in mind next time I do a review, as well as the notice. 
Thank you! I'd personally pass this, but at the least for this first and maybe few other reviews, I'll leave it as requesting a second opinion. --PixDeVl yelltalk to me! 16:35, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Pbritti:
- PS: remember to post
- Providing a second opinion here on PixDeVl's request off-wiki. The initial review was mostly good and it looks like the LEADCITE thing was clarified above; no problems there. The image is correctly licensed, which isn't affected by having people as its subject in this context, at least in the United States. The only other concern I had was on the use of Aleteia as a source, as it was criticized at an RSN discussion. However, their about page indicates they have some editorial oversight and the article only uses them for uncontroversial information, so I don't think this is a sticking issue.
Approved! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:42, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
- @TechnoSquirrel69: Thanks for the review and helping the new editor! ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:23, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
GA review
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- This review is transcluded from Talk:The Hillbilly Thomists/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Pbritti (talk · contribs) 03:38, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: HistoryTheorist (talk · contribs) 03:48, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
Oh boy... I can't believe I'm getting myself into another GA review when I am quite busy but I can't resist reviewing an article about a band of Catholic friars! Let's hope my enthusiasm carries me through (and their music) to give you a quick review of this article. Please be patient if I am slower than I anticipate though. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 03:48, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
source checks
- Earwig looks good. However, for your Bl. Jordan of Saxony quote, I would recommend giving some sort of attribution to him in the text or paraphrasing it.
- So sorry, but do you mind pointing the quote out a bit more specifically?
- source #4 checks out
- source #25 checks out
When checking ref #1 the members, they all checked out as members, but it didn't verify that Sanders and Elliott were former members. Could you use a different source to verify that please?
- They are no longer listed as members in current sources and my understanding is that they are no longer Dominican friars. I have duplicated the citation used for the current members to cite their exclusion in current member lists.
- source #5 checks out
- Rod Dreher seems to like album, so source #6 checks out.
- Yeah, a tad bit of a subjective appraisal of his opinion, but I hoped it tracked.
I get it, Rod Dreher is a big deal for American Conservatives.
- Yeah, a tad bit of a subjective appraisal of his opinion, but I hoped it tracked.
- source #3 checks out
- source #9 checks out
- source #10 checks out
- source #11 checks out
- I was initially skeptical about Bluegrass Today as its website design resembles blogs and other less than reliable sources, but to their credit, they have named authors with decent credentials and good articles like Emmylou Harris have a Bluegrass Today reference, so all good there.
- I also initially ruled them out until I saw that they were used on other reviewed articles. I guess they have a proper editorial team, if only a mediocre design team.
- I was initially skeptical about Bluegrass Today as its website design resembles blogs and other less than reliable sources, but to their credit, they have named authors with decent credentials and good articles like Emmylou Harris have a Bluegrass Today reference, so all good there.
- source #12 checks out
- source #13 checks out
- source #14 checks out
- source #15 and 17 check out; I know Aletia is not the best of sources (somebody removed it on an article I was working on) but I checked the article talk page, and I will accept your rationale for using it to source uncontroversial claims.
- source #18 checks out, although I would add a more than phrase or something similar, because the article is phrased such that 600 was an approximation.
- source #21 checks out, but you misspelled World and said work instead
- source #16 checks out
- source #22 checks out
- source #23 checks out
- source #24 checks out
- For the 2024 tour, source #7 says basically nothing about it, but source 4 does. Perhaps you should replace the ref there or just get rid of the reference to source #7.
Overall, there is no original research and all sources used are reliable for the purpose they serve. All sources with disputed reliability are used to support uncontroversial details.
prose notes
- Link Providence College because I know it's the one in Rhode Island but I also know of similarly named colleges like Providence Christian College.
- I think I have them linked on first mention.
- Never mind, I was starting from the end and didn't see it earlier. Sorry.
- I think I have them linked on first mention.
- Also, you should include the first name of Simon Teller you refer to in the final paragraph of Marigold because it very well could have been his brother.
- Done. Good call.
were recognizable from inclusion
feels like an awkward way to say that hymns of tracks #1 and #2 appeared in Coen Brothers films and I would recommend rephrasing.- Done. Blech, what terrible phrasing on my end there. Thanks for spotting that!
When I am done, I will ping you but feel free to address the comments in the meantime. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 05:30, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
- @HistoryTheorist: Thank you for the review! I have made a number of adjustments to reflect your suggestions. Let me know what you think on your time, as my attention will be largely elsewhere over the next 48 hours. ~ Pbritti (talk) 20:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
@Pbritti: Alright, I think that I don't have any further comments except that this band reminds me of the Smoky Mountain Hymns albums I listened to (except that the Hillbilly Thomists need a hammered dulcimer). Great work! I enjoyed reviewing this article. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 23:31, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
- @HistoryTheorist: Thanks for the review! I think everything that was outstanding has been addressed! ~ Pbritti (talk) 02:17, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
- Alright, I'm going to pass the article. I made some minor copyedits that you had missed because I wanted to quickly pass the article and give it the green badge now. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 16:18, 11 April 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.