Talk:Prayer of the Refugee/GA1
Latest comment: 7 years ago by Aoba47 in topic 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.
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Aoba47 (talk · contribs) 20:50, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
- Grabbing this for a review. Aoba47 (talk) 20:50, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
- Comments
- Reference 10 is dead/broken and needs to either be replaced with a new source or through a website archive.
- Huh, I thought I got that one. Anyway, done.
- I would suggest being a little more descriptive with the ALT text for the infobox image (i.e. describing what it is in the image).
- May have gone a bit overboard with the ALT, but I think it accurately describes the image.
- Could you add the year that this song was recorded to the infobox if known?
- Done
- I do not think you need “long” in the phrase “three minutes and nineteen seconds long”.
- Done
- I could not see this song being identified as examples of “hardcore punk” and “melodic hardcore” in the source cited (i.e. the AllMusic source). Could you point this out in the source for me or use a different source to support this? Identifying a song’s genre can be pretty strict for these types of article so I just want to sure that is clearly cited and supported.
- This is when things start to get a bit difficult. None of the sources actually go into detail about the song's genre, and only mention hardcore punk and melodic hardcore in the case of the album as a whole. The MusicNotes source calls "Prayer of the Refugee" hardcore punk, but it also calls it punk revival, which is a genre that no critic has ever used to describe Rise Against (at least to my knowledge. I've worked on just most of the band's articles). I'm not entirely sure what you want to do here. I used hardcore punk and melodic hardcore as those are the two genres that most critics attribute Rise Against to.
- I would say that this is fine (at least from my perspective) and those genres seem closely tied to not only the band, but the parent album in which the song appears so I think it should be okay. I just wanted to raise this to your attention in case you wanted to do further work with this article. Aoba47 (talk) 14:18, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
- This is when things start to get a bit difficult. None of the sources actually go into detail about the song's genre, and only mention hardcore punk and melodic hardcore in the case of the album as a whole. The MusicNotes source calls "Prayer of the Refugee" hardcore punk, but it also calls it punk revival, which is a genre that no critic has ever used to describe Rise Against (at least to my knowledge. I've worked on just most of the band's articles). I'm not entirely sure what you want to do here. I used hardcore punk and melodic hardcore as those are the two genres that most critics attribute Rise Against to.
- I am not sure if the audio sample is exactly necessary as the caption and the incorporation of the sample into the article does not appear to illustrate a point beyond the text. I would either suggest removing the audio sample altogether or putting some critic’s opinion or description of the song’s instrumental to show how this sample can better illustrate the content rather than just having the reader go through the text.
- As much as it pains me to see the audio sample gone (I always like listening to audio samples in articles) you're right. I've removed it from the article.
- I always like listening to audio samples in these types of articles too; I have received this note in the past too so I know what you mean. If you find anything about the song's instrumental and/or sound, then you may be able to add it again in the future with a more descriptive caption. Thank you for addressing this. Aoba47 (talk) 14:18, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
- As much as it pains me to see the audio sample gone (I always like listening to audio samples in articles) you're right. I've removed it from the article.
- Final comment
- Wonderful work with this article. Once my comments are addressed, I will pass this. Aoba47 (talk) 03:18, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Aoba47: I have addressed all of your issues. BTW, just wanted to spread the good news. There is now a bot that will automatically fill out all of your references with archived urls in just a few seconds. Just sign in to iabot (it uses your Wikipedia account), and tell it which article you want to fill out, and that's it. I used it on this article, as you can see in the history. It filled out 10 references with archived urls in about 3 seconds. Seriously, it's a godsend. Instead of an hour's work filling out references with archived urls, now you can do it in just a few seconds. Famous Hobo (talk) 05:49, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for addressing my comments. This was a very interesting read and I enjoyed reviewing this. I will ✓ Pass this. Thank you for letting me know about the iabot as that was the primary thing that I really wanted from Wikipedia as archiving all of the sources manually (especially for longer articles) can be a real pain and take a lot of time away from actual working on the content so I will definitely use it in the future! Good luck with your future projects, and I look forward to working with you in the future. Aoba47 (talk) 14:18, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Aoba47: I have addressed all of your issues. BTW, just wanted to spread the good news. There is now a bot that will automatically fill out all of your references with archived urls in just a few seconds. Just sign in to iabot (it uses your Wikipedia account), and tell it which article you want to fill out, and that's it. I used it on this article, as you can see in the history. It filled out 10 references with archived urls in about 3 seconds. Seriously, it's a godsend. Instead of an hour's work filling out references with archived urls, now you can do it in just a few seconds. Famous Hobo (talk) 05:49, 10 May 2017 (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.