Talk:The Words That Maketh Murder

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Words That Maketh Murder/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:59, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

• There are four dablinks to fix

Origin and recording

• "The song is known to have been written" → The song was written
• Same in next sentence

Composition and lyrics

• Reduce File:WordsMakethMurder.ogg to <22.5s and about 65kbps
• Apart from the autoharp part, the entire first paragraph is unreferenced

Release

• "Released digitally on February 6" - source?
• Wouldn't the last two sentences of this paragraph be better in the live performances section?

Live performances

• External links should not be in prose
• I moved a ref to the end of a sentence, as they should usually be placed there
• Tour name should not be italicised
• Tour info needs a source

Music video

• Convention is to place the music video section before live performances
• The image should be removed per WP:NFCC
• Info about still photography in other videos is irrelevant and should be placed in the song's or the album's article
• Link Pitchfork Media
• "It was re-released on Dailymotion the following day and on YouTube on January 17." - source?

Release history

• Sources?

Musicians and personnel

• Source?

References

• You do not need to link to a website's homepage. See my edit for an example
• In ref 2 (NME interview) you must give a link or info of the physical magazine; people must know how to find the published quote
• Discogs is unreliable
• The iTunes Store publishes ref 27, not iTunes

Summary

I am placing the review on hold for seven days, awaiting improvements. Adabow (talk · contribs) 06:42, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to review it and suggesting improvements! Just a few questions...

• "Apart from the autoharp part, the entire first paragraph is unreferenced"; the tabs/chords/sheet music for the song aren't available online yet and even when they are, I doubt that a guitar tabs site would be considered a reliable source?

• Then this is original research. Reliable sheet music sources include Musicnotes.com and Sheetmusicplus.com, but if you find another site then see whether it passes WP:IRS. Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:54, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

• "Wouldn't the last two sentences of this paragraph be better in the live performances section?"; the last two sentences relate to in-studio radio promotion rather than performances in concert.

• It does not matter; live performances include radio/television performances and concert performances. Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:54, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

• "Tour name should not be italicised"/"Tour info needs a source"; the italics refer to the album title, not the tour itself. And by tour info do you mean the line "the song has been performed at all of Harvey's live shows on the European leg of the Let England Shake tour throughout February and March 2011"? If so, would a Last.fm event guide be considered a reliable source?

• The tour name is different from the album name, for example The Fame Ball Tour, not The Fame Ball Tour. And if the page is actually published by Last.fm, not a user, then yes it would be reliable. Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:54, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

• "The image should be removed per WP:NFCC"; this is going to come across as a bit snobby, but why is an image for Nirvana's "In Bloom" video allowed and not here?

• That screenshot meets WP:NFCC as it demonstrates the 1960s effect parodied in the video. This screenshot simply shows her playing an autoharp. Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:54, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

• "In ref 2 (NME interview) you must give a link or info of the physical magazine; people must know how to find the published quote"; the interview video from which the quote is taken is available on both NMETV on NME.com and YouTube by NME's official channel. Are either/both of these considered reliable sources?

• The NME.com link would be better, but both are reliable. Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:54, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Other than that, thanks again, I'll be sure to fix the article over the next few days. Idiotchalk (talk) 20:04, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Due to a long hold period, I am failing this article. Decent improvements have been made, but there are still a few issues to pick up on. Read over all my points and address them before renominating the article. Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:58, 1 April 2011 (UTC)