Legendaddy (album) edit
| Toolbox |
|---|
 | This peer review discussion is closed. |
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to take it to a Good Article status and I want to receive feedback in order to improve it. The previous peer review only got one minor suggestion, so I would like to receive more if that is possible.
Thanks, Brankestein (talk) 19:43, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Comments from Z1720 edit
Some comments after a quick skim:
- The "Composition" section is quite long. I suggest cutting unnecessary words/prose or dividing it using level 3 headings
- The "Reception" section suffers from a "X said Y" sentence structure. WP:RECEPTION has advice on how to avoid this. I also think that it is quite long and that the information should be summarised more effectively. For example, if multiple sources give the same comments, then each source does not need to be named as giving that comment in the prose. Instead, group the comments together in a sentence, and cite the reviews at the end of the sentence.
- I suggest archiving the links in the reference section
- The reference for the "Personal" section should be given.
- There are many sentences in the article that use multiple sources to verify what it says. Are all of those sources necessary? If possible, take out the sources that are of a lesser quality if there are 3 or more sources used for the sentence (lesser quality, starting from the weakest, would probably be social media posts, then social media posts, then interviews with the artist).
Overall, I think this is almost ready for GAN, and could possibly continue onto FAC after a music-specialist reviews the article (as I do not usually focus on those types of articles). I hope this helps. Z1720 (talk) 00:05, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
- Hello. Thank you for your time and comments. I cut the "Composition" section but it may still be too long. Is there a way to archive multiple links automatically (since there are a lot in this article)? I saw someone do that for an awards list, probably with a bot. Regarding the "Personnel" section, I have been told that it is no longer required to add a reference for the album's credits, but I could add it. I have yet to rework the "Reception" section following your suggestion.--Brankestein (talk) 22:29, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
- I use User:InternetArchiveBot, which will archive multiple sites quickly. Go to the Wikilink and click "Configure" at the top, which will bring you to a separate page where you can ask the bot to archive the sites on the page. Z1720 (talk) 03:08, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- I have yet to edit the reception section. I had been busy recently, but I have a question. I saw that the album's liner notes have less songwriters than those credited on streaming services like Spotify, Youtube and Tidal. Should I leave the credits of those services or should I change them to the liner notes?--Brankestein (talk) 18:04, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
- I have now summarised the reception section. Brankestein (talk) 19:50, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
- I have yet to edit the reception section. I had been busy recently, but I have a question. I saw that the album's liner notes have less songwriters than those credited on streaming services like Spotify, Youtube and Tidal. Should I leave the credits of those services or should I change them to the liner notes?--Brankestein (talk) 18:04, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
- I use User:InternetArchiveBot, which will archive multiple sites quickly. Go to the Wikilink and click "Configure" at the top, which will bring you to a separate page where you can ask the bot to archive the sites on the page. Z1720 (talk) 03:08, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- Hello. Thank you for your time and comments. I cut the "Composition" section but it may still be too long. Is there a way to archive multiple links automatically (since there are a lot in this article)? I saw someone do that for an awards list, probably with a bot. Regarding the "Personnel" section, I have been told that it is no longer required to add a reference for the album's credits, but I could add it. I have yet to rework the "Reception" section following your suggestion.--Brankestein (talk) 22:29, 12 October 2022 (UTC)