Talk:For Those Who Have Heart/Archive 1

Archive 1

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:For Those Who Have Heart/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Adabow (talk · contribs) 20:41, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   No OR, but many references seem unreliable to me.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   The caption says that Mike Cortda designed the original cover art; how do you know this? Is it important enough to include in the article? If it is, then I suggest moving it to the body, rather than being a caption.

   It's mentioned in the album booklet. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 01:23, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

   The reissue booklet describes the author of the original cover art? Adabow (talk) 00:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

   In both booklets, Mike Cortda is credited for the album art. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 00:52, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

   Then you need to cite the original album booklet. Adabow (talk) 07:09, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

    Done Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 11:28, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Prose and content

• Woodard's quote at the beginning of "Signing with Victory and recording" is long and a bit confusing. Could you please paraphrase it to cut to the point faster? Adabow (talk · contribs) 21:31, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

 Done Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 01:25, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I mean the quote "A friend of mine said he had the AIM screenname of someone at Victory Records. I didn't believe him, but I still started communicating with the guy. We IM'ed back and forth for about six months". The point is that Woodard contacted someone at Victory Records. The IMing is irrelevant. Adabow (talk) 22:58, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 23:31, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

• The chart information should go in the reception section. Adabow (talk) 22:58, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I feel there isn't enough chart information for it to be moved into the reception section. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 23:20, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

The size is irrelevant. The chart info is about how the album was received commercially, and is not part of its release info. Adabow (talk) 23:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 00:54, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

What about the Heatseekers chart? Adabow (talk) 07:00, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done I had missed that. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 11:28, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

• Where is the information about single releases? Release dates should be included (and sourced). Adabow (talk) 22:58, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

The release of a music video counts as the release of a single. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 23:25, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

A music video most certainly does not make a song a single. Singles are often promoted by music videos, but that is not the making of a single. A single is released via digital download, CD single, vinyl single, official radio adds, etc. Many singles do not have music videos, and many non-single songs have music videos. Adabow (talk) 23:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

• Can you write a section about the content of the album - the music and themes? Adabow (talk) 22:58, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

What's in the article is all that has been found – there isn't anything available on any particular songs, only the quote box about the message the album was trying to convey. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 23:20, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

• The reviews read like a WP:QUOTEFARM. Try to paraphrase more. Adabow (talk) 22:58, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 01:01, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

• The main tracklisting uses a simple list format, but the reissue additions use the more intricate template format. Be consistent. Also, you should list writers and producers here. If one person or the band wrote or produced all or nearly all of the songs, you could write something like "All songs written by [name], with additional writers noted." Adabow (talk) 22:58, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Per MOS:ALBUM#Track listing: "A track listing should generally be formatted as a numbered list" which is appropriate for the original 12-track listing, while "In more complicated situations, a table or the {{Track listing}} template may be a better choice" is appropriate for the reissue bonus tracks and DVD. In the booklet for both the original and reissue editions of the albums, neither say who wrote what. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 23:20, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

How are the bonus issues "more complicated"? Adabow (talk) 23:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Bonus tracks are often hidden by the templates as they are additional material, they also provide notes (see under Reissue CD bonus tracks how there is (Re-recorded from And Their Name Was Treason) etc.). Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 23:55, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

This could be done without the tracklisting template. However, it's not a big deal or part of the GA criteria, so I'll drop it. Adabow (talk) 00:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

References

• Ref 2 (chitownvideo) looks like a copyright-violating channel, not the interviewer's channel. Same with ref 21. Adabow (talk · contribs) 21:31, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

 Done Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 01:35, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

• For ref 5 (thrash magazine) can you include the times that the relevant statements are made? The "at=" parameter in {{cite interview}} works well for this. Adabow (talk · contribs) 21:31, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Will do this tomorrow. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 01:38, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done had forgotten about this. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 13:19, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

• Why is Allschools.de a reliable source? Who publishes it? Adabow (talk · contribs) 21:31, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

 Done Removed. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 01:35, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

• Why is punktastic.com/ reliable? Adabow (talk · contribs) 21:31, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

 Done Removed. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 01:38, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

*I have tagged further sources which I am dubious about. This doesn't necessarily mean they are unreliable, but if you believe they are reliable I need you to justify that. Adabow (talk) 22:58, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Nudge Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 12:56, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

OK, I think this article meets the GA criteria now, so I am listing it. Well done! I recommend that you paraphrase review quotes further, and make the tracklisting section uniform. Adabow (talk) 21:13, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing! I'll probs get 'round to that when I take it to FAC in the far far future. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 22:56, 8 November 2013 (UTC)