GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:Road to Ruin (Ramones album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 11:32, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
Nominator: CrowzRSA

Hi! My review for this article will be here shortly.   --Seabuckthorn  11:32, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply


1: Well-written

Check for WP:LEAD:  

  1. Check for Correct Structure of Lead Section:     Done
  2. Check for Citations (WP:LEADCITE):     Done
  3. Check for Introductory text:     Done
    • Check for Provide an accessible overview (MOS:INTRO):     Done  
      • Major Point 1: Conception "It was the first Ramones album to feature new drummer Marky Ramone, who replaced founding member Tommy Ramone. Tommy left due to lack of album sales but stayed with the band to produce the album with Ed Stasium. The artwork's concept was designed by Ramones fan Gus MacDonald, and later modified by John Holmstrom to included Marky instead of Tommy." (summarised well in the lead)  
      • Major Point 2: Lyrics and compositions "The songs on Road to Ruin were considered by both fans and critics as an attempt to get the band more airplay. The album incorporated musical elements which were unheard of in punk rock, such as guitar solos and ballads." (summarised well in the lead)  
      • Major Point 3: Reception "The difference in style caused for mixed reviews by critics, with many pointing out that the band was trying to sell more records through a change in form. This attempt by the band failed, as Road to Ruin debuted at 103 on the Billboard 200, nearly 50 places behind it's predecessor Rocket to Russia." (summarised well in the lead)  
    • Check for Relative emphasis:     Done  
      • Major Point 1: Conception "It was the first Ramones album to feature new drummer Marky Ramone, who replaced founding member Tommy Ramone. Tommy left due to lack of album sales but stayed with the band to produce the album with Ed Stasium. The artwork's concept was designed by Ramones fan Gus MacDonald, and later modified by John Holmstrom to included Marky instead of Tommy." (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body)  
      • Major Point 2: Lyrics and compositions "The songs on Road to Ruin were considered by both fans and critics as an attempt to get the band more airplay. The album incorporated musical elements which were unheard of in punk rock, such as guitar solos and ballads." (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body)  
      • Major Point 3: Reception "The difference in style caused for mixed reviews by critics, with many pointing out that the band was trying to sell more records through a change in form. This attempt by the band failed, as Road to Ruin debuted at 103 on the Billboard 200, nearly 50 places behind it's predecessor Rocket to Russia." (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body)  
    • Check for Opening paragraph (MOS:BEGIN):     Done
      • Check for First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE):     Done
        • "Road to Ruin is the fourth studio album by the American punk rock band The Ramones, released on September 21, 1978 through Sire Records."
      • Check for Format of the first sentence (MOS:BOLDTITLE):     Done
      • Check for Proper names and titles:     Done
      • Check for Abbreviations and synonyms (MOS:BOLDSYN):   None
      • Check for Foreign language (MOS:FORLANG):   None
      • Check for Pronunciation:   None
      • Check for Contextual links (MOS:CONTEXTLINK):     Done
      • Check for Biographies:   NA
      • Check for Organisms:   NA
  4. Check for Biographies of living persons:   NA
  5. Check for Alternative names (MOS:LEADALT):     Done
    • Check for Non-English titles:  
    • Check for Usage in first sentence:  
    • Check for Separate section usage:  
  6. Check for Length (WP:LEADLENGTH):     Done
  7. Check for Clutter (WP:LEADCLUTTER):   None
  Done

Check for WP:LAYOUT:     Done

  1. Check for Body sections: WP:BODY, MOS:BODY.     Done
    • Check for Headings and sections:     Done
    • Check for Section templates and summary style:     Done
    • Check for Paragraphs (MOS:PARAGRAPHS):     Done
  2. Check for Standard appendices and footers (MOS:APPENDIX):     Done
    • Check for Order of sections (WP:ORDER):     Done
    • Check for Works or publications:     Done
    • Check for See also section (MOS:SEEALSO):     Done
    • Check for Notes and references (WP:FNNR):     Done
    • Check for Further reading (WP:FURTHER):     Done
    • Check for External links (WP:LAYOUTEL):     Done
    • Check for Links to sister projects:     Done
    • Check for Navigation templates:     Done
  3. Check for Formatting:     Done
    • Check for Images (WP:LAYIM):     Done
    • Check for Links:     Done
    • Check for Horizontal rule (WP:LINE):     Done
WP:WTW:  
  Done

Check for WP:WTW:     Done

  1. Check for Words that may introduce bias:     Done
    • Check for Puffery (WP:PEA):     Done
    • Check for Contentious labels (WP:LABEL):     Done
    • Check for Unsupported attributions (WP:WEASEL):     Done
    • Check for Expressions of doubt (WP:ALLEGED):     Done
    • Check for Editorializing (MOS:OPED):     Done
    • Check for Synonyms for said (WP:SAY):     Done
  2. Check for Expressions that lack precision:     Done
    • Check for Euphemisms (WP:EUPHEMISM):     Done
    • Check for Clichés and idioms (WP:IDIOM):     Done
    • Check for Relative time references (WP:REALTIME):     Done
    • Check for Neologisms (WP:PEA):   None
  3. Check for Offensive material (WP:F***):     Done

Check for WP:MOSFICT:     Done

  1. Check for Real-world perspective (WP:Real world):     Done
    • Check for Primary and secondary information (WP:PASI):     Done
    • Check for Contextual presentation (MOS:PLOT):     Done
  Done


2: Verifiable with no original research

WP:RS:  
  Done

Check for WP:RS:     Done

Cross-checked with other FAs: Reign in Blood & Still Reigning

  1. Check for the material (WP:RSVETTING):   (not contentious)   Done
    • Is it contentious?:   No
    • Does the ref indeed support the material?:  
  2. Check for the author (WP:RSVETTING):     Done
    • Who is the author?:  
    • Does the author have a Wikipedia article?:  
    • What are the author's academic credentials and professional experience?:  
    • What else has the author published?:  
    • Is the author, or this work, cited in other reliable sources? In academic works?:  
  3. Check for the publication (WP:RSVETTING):     Done
  4. Check for Self-published sources (WP:SPS):  
  Done

Check for inline citations WP:MINREF:     Done

  1. Check for Direct quotations:     Done
  2. Check for Likely to be challenged:     Done
  3. Check for Contentious material about living persons (WP:BLP):   NA
WP:NOR:  
  Done
  1. Check for primary sources (WP:PRIMARY):     Done
  2. Check for synthesis (WP:SYN):     Done
  3. Check for original images (WP:OI):     Done


3: Broad in its coverage

  Done

Cross-checked with other FAs: Reign in Blood & Still Reigning

  1. Check for Article scope as defined by reliable sources:  
    1. Check for The extent of the subject matter in these RS:  
    2. Check for Out of scope:  
  2. Check for The range of material that belongs in the article:  
    1. Check for All material that is notable is covered:  
    2. Check for All material that is referenced is covered:  
    3. Check for All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered:  
    4. Check for The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge:  
    5. Check for Stay on topic and no wandering off-topic (WP:OFFTOPIC):  
      • The first paragraph of the Conception section "After the band's previous album … Marc Bell went under the alias of Marky Ramone" appears somewhat offtopic to me. I’m not sure how it’s relevant to the conception of the album. The drummer Tommy Ramone’s replacement process can be, I believe, skimmed if not skipped.
b. Focused:  
  Done
  1. Check for Readability issues (WP:LENGTH):  
  2. Check for Article size (WP:TOO LONG!):  


4: Neutral

  Done

4. Fair representation without bias:     Done

  1. Check for POV (WP:YESPOV):     Done
  2. Check for naming (WP:POVNAMING):     Done
  3. Check for structure (WP:STRUCTURE):     Done
  4. Check for Due and undue weight (WP:DUE):     Done
  5. Check for Balancing aspects (WP:BALASPS):     Done
  6. Check for Giving "equal validity" (WP:VALID):     Done
  7. Check for Balance (WP:YESPOV):     Done
  8. Check for Impartial tone (WP:IMPARTIAL):     Done
  9. Check for Describing aesthetic opinions (WP:SUBJECTIVE):     Done
  10. Check for Words to watch (WP:YESPOV):     Done
  11. Check for Attributing and specifying biased statements (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV):     Done
  12. Check for Fringe theories and pseudoscience (WP:PSCI):   None
  13. Check for Religion (WP:RNPOV):   None


5: Stable: No edit wars, etc:   Yes

6: Images   Done (NFC with a valid FUR)

Images:  
  Done

6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:     Done

  1. Check for copyright tags (WP:TAGS):     Done
  2. Check for copyright status:     Done
  3. Check for non-free content (WP:NFC):     Done
  4. Check for valid fair use rationales (WP:FUR):     Done

6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:     Done

  1. Check for image relevance (WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE):     Done
  2. Check for Images for the lead (WP:LEADIMAGE):     Done
  3. Check for suitable captions (WP:CAPTION):     Done


Thanks, CrowzRSA, very much for your diligence here. I do have some insights based on the above checklist that I think will improve the article:

  • The first paragraph of the Conception section "After the band's previous album … Marc Bell went under the alias of Marky Ramone" appears somewhat offtopic to me. I’m not sure how it’s relevant to the conception of the album. The drummer Tommy Ramone’s replacement process can be, I believe, skimmed if not skipped.
  • I took a few things out, but I would think since it is the band's first change in line-up it woould be a significant topic to put on this page. I know it has more-so to do with the actual band rather than album, but I feel as though including the process the members went through to obtain a new drummer is notable to the album since it is more-or-less the origin/history of the album.———I took out the information on the alias and made certain things more concise.
  • I think the statement "Even though the band had attempted to gain more mainstream acceptance with a change in musical style, it did not expand their audience as much as anticipated" can be more clear and easy to follow. (1a issue)
  •   Fixed — I reworded and added quote by Tommy to assure it was not against WP:POV.
  • "With the band's slight change in musical style, material included on the album was intended to gain a sense of mainstream acceptance, though the band members felt as though this was not achieved.[8][9] Tommy relates: "Road to Ruin was a flop Stateside, even though it had been a very deliberate attempt to secure American radioplay."[9]" That's perfect! Thanks a lot!   --Seabuckthorn  01:40, 16 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

Besides that, I think the article looks excellent. Please feel free to strike out any recommendation from this review which you think will not help in improving the article which is our main aim here. All the best,   --Seabuckthorn  09:18, 15 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

Promoting the article to GA status.   --Seabuckthorn  01:40, 16 February 2014 (UTC)Reply

Looking for some help on the lead section of this article, more balanced.

edit

Hi, the second paragraph of the lead section of this article especially I feel could use work. It's uncited, and just focuses on asserting that fans and critics alike consider the album an attempt to get more airplay. And it wraps it up with "this attempt by the band failed". This doesn't come across as unbiased or fair to me. The opening paragraph was much more balanced, with positive as well. Pointing out that "I Wanna Be Sedated" became one of their most well known songs.

I also feel the article could mention more of the album's legacy. How it's a fan favorite, and the reception part of the article points out some people love it, so why doesn't the opening lead section do that too? Since it mentions aspects of the reception, but mainly the negative aspect for some reason. Plus, sales does not equal reception, why would music history on wikipedia be so focused on the money aspect? But I digress there.

Stuff like how "I wanna be sedated" went on to become a hit with a music video a decade later for Ramones Mania, is featured in movies like Spider-Man: Far From Home etc, lots of things could be in this article about it's positive legacy. The album is covered in it's entirely by The Mr. T Experience, that's also interesting and cool. The album contains fan favs like I Just Wanna Have Something To Do, and She's The One was selected by Rhino as a music video to promote their 40th Anniversary re-release. It's been pointed out that the album shows the band evolving with diverse styles and influences. My point, it's also a beloved album, seemingly unanimously in the top 4 of a beloved band by most people who talk about the band today. It's also one of their top albums on Spotify. Could just use a more balanced lead section. Hopefully others would also be happy to help this article.

Psychogoatee (talk) 18:07, 11 July 2021 (UTC)Reply