Talk:11 (Bryan Adams album)
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 11 (Bryan Adams album) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
11 (Bryan Adams 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. | ||||||||||
|
3rd and 4th single?
editContrary to what 80.212.230.96 says there is no indication that a forth single has been released from Byran Adams website, he might of been confused because a Video for "Mysterious ways" was originally on the front page of his website, its been replaced with one for "She's Got a Way".
Over the past few weeks a new video for each of the albums tracks has appeared on the website, and is going to be featured on the upcoming deluxe DVD package, the videos are not an indication the song is a single, they are previews for the DVD, unless there is other proof it should be removed.
also, as a matter of fact, according to the new posts and the official poll on bryan's official forum there actually isn't a 3rd single yet, the news postings on bryanadams.com have only offcially confirmed the first two singles. Silver007 (talk) 10:16, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:11 (Bryan Adams album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Adabow (talk · contribs) 21:35, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Lead
edit- Done Could do with a rewrite to form a NPOV, especially the 3rd paragraph, which is contradictory ("The album was a commercial success... the album has been viewed as a commercial failure").
Conception
edit- Done ...it was his eleventh studio album, if you include... Don't use second person pronouns, maybe ...it was his eleventh studio album, when album x is included
- Done ..significant portions of the album was produced.. were produced
- Done They'd record the album.. → Vallance and Adams recorded the album..
- Done ..which they'd usually carry along.. → ..which they usually carried along..
- Done There are more contractions used in the rest of the article which need to be expanded
Writing and themes
edit- Done They hooked up.. - remove colloquial language
Release
edit- Done The finishing touches to the album was done → were done
- Done B-sides are usually written with a capital 'B'
- Done Write a summarising sentence for the reviews
- What do you mean? --TIAYN (talk) 15:48, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry I missed this one. I mean something like "11 received mixed reviews from critics." Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:22, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
- Done "10 thousand" → ten thousand
- Done All numbers less than ten should be written out in full, however I strongly recommend that you do this for all numbers below 100.
Track listing
edit- Done Needs a reference for writers
- Is that really neccessary? The source for this would be the album itself, it would be like sourcing the cover.. Second, its not usually referenced in other GAs i've seen. --TIAYN (talk) 08:16, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, the album liner notes are fin to use as a source; you can use {{Cite music release notes}} Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:34, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
- Is that really neccessary? The source for this would be the album itself, it would be like sourcing the cover.. Second, its not usually referenced in other GAs i've seen. --TIAYN (talk) 08:16, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Personnel
edit- Done Needs a source
- Is that really neccessary? The source for this would be the album itself, it would be like sourcing the cover.. Second, its not usually referenced in other GAs i've seen. --TIAYN (talk) 08:16, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Release history
edit- Done Needs refs and completion
- Is that really neccessary? The source for this would be the album itself, it would be like sourcing the cover.. Second, its not usually referenced in other GAs i've seen. --TIAYN (talk) 08:16, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Charts and certifications
edit- Done References should be next to the chart name, not the peak position. For certifications you can place the ref in either cell.
- Done Link charts
- What's up with the European Albums Chart whacked on the end?
- It charted, but they don't know what position it reached..
--TIAYN (talk) 08:14, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
- Done --TIAYN (talk) 15:48, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Media
edit- Done Does the deluxe edition cover add anything to the article? It uses the same photograph as the original, and is just recoloured. I feel it fails WP:NFCC #8.
- Done The same goes for File:BA-I Thought-Video.jpg it is not discussed in the article.
There is a lot of work to do, butI will place the review on hold now. Adabow (talk · contribs) 22:18, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for the amendments; I will pass the article now. Just a couple of final comments: why is the European Albums Chart not in alphabetical order? The final sentence of the lead also needs a rewrite. Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:10, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Assessment comment
editThe comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:11 (Bryan Adams album)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Comment(s) | Press [show] to view → |
---|---|
Start
C class criteria
B class criteria
|
Last edited at 14:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 05:45, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
DMY vs MDY dates
editGreetings all,
I notice that this article has been tagged as {{use MDY dates}} since June of 2013. Recently, however, an IP editor 86.161.225.22 has recently been changing a few of them to the DMY format. I have reverted them to the MDY format a couple of times, but both times they have been changed back to DMY. It is my understanding that articles that are created as MDY, have external references that use MDY, and/or have strong national or cultural ties to cultures that prefer MDY, should not be converted to DMY unless there is a compelling reason to do so (or vice versa). Certainly we should be changing all of them if we change any of them; the most important factor is consistency within the article.
From what I see, the article was indeed created as MDY, and doing a spot check of the references, they seem to be about 80% MDY and 20% DMY (the UK and German references mainly). Canada's date formats, of course, are pretty much all over the map, but according to date format by country, nearly all English-language newspapers in Canada use MDY, which seems to be borne out by my reference check; Bryan Adams's own website (www.bryanadams.com) uses MDY as well. At this stage I personally do not see a reason to switch date formats; what are other people's opinions? CThomas3 (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2017 (UTC)