Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/I Don't Remember/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review‎ | I Don't Remember
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Peer review/I Don't Remember)

I Don't Remember edit

I've listed this article for peer review because we (WP:FING) intend to submit the article for WP:FAC. I'm pretty sure it's complete in its coverage, is reasonably neutral, bias wise, and is well written. I'd like some suggestions as to where expansion may be needed, copyediting is needed and any other improvements you can think of.

Thanks,

rm 'w avu 08:38, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Seegoon edit

I'll gladly help out. I blushed a little.

  • Is that really the best single cover you could find? I understand fair use doctrine and all, but I think you could afford to use something a little more clear.
  • Something I've got into the habit of doing is including the catalog number beneath the "label" section in the infobox - see Somewhere Along the Highway for how I do it. I think it's more of a personal preference than a guideline.
  • "It made its radio debut on July 9, 2007 on Australian radio stations.[1] The single was released on August 4, 2007 in Australia,[2] and on August 13, 2007 in the United States.[3]" - Personally, I'd want to link these two sentences, with something like "and subsequently". I think it'd make it flow a little more fluidly.
  • ""I Don't Remember" was rated highly by reviewers" - "rated highly", to me, sounds a little bland. With all that stuff about "compelling prose" and whatnot at WIAFA, I'm sure you can think of something with a dash more verve.
  • "The music video also received some acclaim" - likewise, "some acclaim" is lacklustre. Even "critical acclaim" sounds more interesting.
  • "The song was written by Powderfinger's lead singer, Bernard Fanning following a night he was drinking with the group's bass guitarist John Collins towards the end of the recording phase of Dream Days at the Hotel Existence." - First, I think you need a comma following "Bernard Fanning". Secondly, I'd change "he was" to "he spent", personally.
  • "and even recorded this concept[7] however" - A semicolon is required before "however".
  • "Whilst recording the song in January 2007, Fanning, said in an interview that:" - I don't think you need the comma after "Fanning".
  • "and it's up to us (Powderfinger) to stuff it up now." - Instead of parentheses, I'd use square brackets here.
  • "The music video for "I Don't Remember" was made by Fifty Fifty Films, the same group that Powderfinger collaborated with for the music videos for "Passenger" and "Like a Dog" among others." - I'd make it "Powderfinger had collaborated with" and add a comma after "Like a Dog".
  • "The music video starts with a school bus with children playing and throwing things, and features a young boy who then puts on the song "I Don't Remember" on his iPod and closes his eyes." - Small changes I'd make again; "on a school bus", change "puts on the song" to "selects the track" or something similar.
  • "Also seen is children ordering a chocolate milk called smilo" - I'd change this to "children are seen offering a chocolate milk called smilo".
  • "This is a parody of Yumi Stynes, presenter from Australian music station, Channel V" - This should be "a presenter" or "the presenter", whichever is the case.
  • "Many elements of I Don't Remember's video" - This should be in quotation marks, not italics.
  • "received positive critical response, especially the large numbers of children in it" - This is just unclear.
  • "Kathy McCabe of The Daily Telegraph summarised critical feelings towards the video well, when in her review she stated that "Maybe bands should get kids to play them in videos forever"." - This is the clumsiest part of the article so far; it's poorly written. As a side-note, I expect the publication should be in italics.
  • "In his review of Dream Days at the Hotel Existence, Herald Sun Hit journalist Cameron Adams claimed that "I Don't Remember" was more of an advertisement style song, similar to the first single from the album "Lost and Running"." - Several things. "Herald Sun Hit" should be italicised and I doubt we need a wikilink to "journalist". Most importantly, it's unclear to the reader whether "Lost and Running" is an album or a single. Consider re-ordering the sentence to make things clearer.
  • The age-old debate: is James Bishop a reputable Sputnikmusic reviewer?

I hope all this has steered you in the right direction! Good luck with your terrifying Powderfinger crusade. All my efforts pale weakly and meekly before the mighty WP:FING! Seegoon (talk) 14:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It now looks a lot more professional, in my opinion. As well as being comprehensive, the prose is now what I'd rate as tight and smooth. I hope it passes FAC. If you have any more requests for proofreads or copyedits, feel free to drop me a line. Seegoon (talk) 10:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Jayron32 edit

A few general notes before I get into the meat of my review:

  • Seegoon's review above is excellent. Be sure to take that advice into account, there are many places where the prose can be tightened up to reach the compelling/brilliant standard of WIAFA. Also, consider asking for some outside copyedit help at The League. You can list it there for someone to proofread and copyedit the article, and like peer review, you tend to get a better response if you both list it AND personally invite a few copyeditors on board. Seegoon has some excellent tips, and I am NOT a good copyeditor myself. Also, User:LaraLove is someone I have used before for copyediting, and she has an interest in music articles in general. Feel free to drop her a line and ask her to go over the article and fix things.
  • Carefully go over WP:MUSTARD, Wikipedia's style guide for music pages. It will be scrutinized under those standards in its FA run, so just be certain you follow those guidelines closely, paying close attention to the section on Titles and Headings, and the further style guides it links.
  • Now for the meat of my review:
    • The lead could use to be expanded some. Per WP:LEAD, the lead section should be a full summary of the article. If something has a section in the article, it should probably have a mention in the lead. The biggest ommission I see is the "Background, etc." section, which has NO treatment in the lead.
    • The article is not internal consistant, and in places lacks a world-wide perspective. The lead mentions release as a single in Australia and the U.S., yet the article mentions release in Australia and New Zealand. No treatment is given to the U.S. release or chart performance, and none of the reviews in the "Response" section seems to come from Australian reviews; since it was released in other nations, you might try to search harder for some non-Australian reception, such as U.S., U.K., American, or other press. I notice that there is a UK review of the video; that would imply to me the single was also released there, yet NO mention is given of this. Try to be as comprehensive as possible. Heck, if you can find that it was released as a single in Uzbekistan, mention that too... FAs really seek to be as comprehensive as possible...
      • I haven't been able to find an NZ release date - the only reason I know they released there is because I heard it playing on radio when I was there (the fact that charts.org.nz lists it is also quite convincing, but they don't do release dates :s). It didn't chart in the US - I've noted that in the article. The reception section now includes an AMG review, I'll try and find some more US sites that covered Dream Days. I can't see this UK video review, perhaps if you could point it out to me :) Finally, I have no reason to believe it was released in Uzbekistan, that said I haven't been there in a while, and don't recall them having invented radio last time I was there... Dihydrogen Monoxide 09:19, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • By the way, not a part of the review, but Benmont Tench played keys... Cool. I dig it when you see musicians from around the world working together. But I am rambling. Back to the review...
    • Also, be certain that when you link to YouTube and places like that that the videos there are posted legally. Some fan ripping the video off MTV and posting it on YouTube is a clear copyright violation. Even if the user who posted it has the name Powederfinger in their name, it does not guarantee anything more than the user digs the band. Lyrics websites are also a clear copyright violation; WP:LYRICS is clear on this; you should not link to or use as a reference any website that breaks copyright itself. It's quite OK to reference, say, the video itself without a link to it on the internet, or to the liner notes of the album, if said liner notes publish the lyrics. You don't need web links to everything (or indeed, anything). Print, audio, and video references are fine in and of themselves. See WP:CITE, WP:CITE/ES and WP:CITET for more info on how to cite sources like liner notes and videos.
      • The YouTube video is posted by user "powderfingervideos", who has been confirmed as being a band representative. That's allowed, right? I replaced the lyrics copyvio with the lyrics posted on the band's website, again that's allowed, right? I also cited the liner as the website has been Up & Down & Back Again (:D) of late... Dihydrogen Monoxide 04:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • The bands own website is probably kosher WRT lyrics. I am still a bit leery on the YouTube. How does YouTube verify credentials? Do you have to pinky-swear or something? --Jayron32|talk|contribs 06:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Refs 5,6, 7 and 11 don't contain publication information. Indicate in the ref where they come from.

I hope that gives you something to work from. If you have any more specific questions, or need any more help, feel free to ask, I will do what I can. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 17:59, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

one more thing. http://www.allmusic.com has some extensive reviews of the band and their work, and you don't cite it at all. There may be some more stuff there you can use. See specifically this review. The song infobox is coded to include AMG reviews, and this song was a "pick" and rated at 3.5 stars. See also this page. Again, if you need anything, just ask! --Jayron32|talk|contribs 18:03, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll add info from the AMG review, but how do you activate it in the infobox? Dihydrogen Monoxide 05:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Try using the following. It works in the album infobox, should work in the singles box as well: | Reviews = *[[All Music Guide]] {{rating-5|3.5}}. And don't forget to reference it to the page with the rating itself. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 05:43, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Infobox Single doesn't have a reviews parameter, so that won't work (I thought there was some other trick or something, but it seems not). Dihydrogen Monoxide 05:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably because it's unusual that a particular single receives reviews in the same way that an album would receive reviews. Spebi 08:22, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR t 06:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Copy-pasted below. Dihydrogen Monoxide 08:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

  • Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
  • The script has spotted the following contractions: Don't, Don't, Don't, Don't, Don't, Don't, Don't, Don't, Don't, doesn't, doesn't, don't, Don't, Don't, Don't, Don't, Don't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, APR t 06:32, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Comments from Daniel edit

I haven't read the above comments, so my advanced apologies if this duplicates anything they've said.

  • It seems you are referencing the lead. In that case, paragraph two (especially the last sentence) needs a reference.
  • whilst -> while.
  • Link DD the first time you use it in the Background section.
  • Link riff on the first it's used in the section, as it gets repeated a few times.
  • Another whilst.
  • ...by stating in her review that "Maybe bands should get kids to play them in videos forever" -> ...by stating in her review that "maybe bands should get kids to play them in videos forever" or "[m]aybe".
    • I think it'd be better with [maybe]. Much as 4/5 letters are identical, it'd just look tarded with [m]aybe. --rm 'w avu 12:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reference the parodies, or else they're OR interpretation.
    • Links to the music videos have been removed - not sure what else we can do about it... Dihydrogen Monoxide 11:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I still disagree with removing the reference to the music video, because it's hard evidence of what it's all about. I think we should put it back in. --rm 'w avu 12:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • [sic] should be [sic], if I recall correctly (maybe even link it as well).
  • "I Don't Remember" was released in New Zealand and the United States, but failed to chart. -> add dates.

Dunno if this is long enough to take the next step, but we'll see. Daniel (talk) 09:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/I_Don%27t_Remember/archive1&oldid=251098918"