Wikipedia:Peer review/Ramones (album)/archive1

Ramones (album)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it recently failed its second FAC. I believe with a thorough copy-edit of the entire article, it should be ready for nomination again. I have fixed everything mentioned in the FAC, except the unspecific comments, which is why I am listing it for peer review. I seriously hope this can be done soon, and as thoroughly and specifically as possible. By the way, I have peer reviewed the following articles: List of Russian inventors, Jessica Simpson discography, So Yesterday, Christina Aguilera, Hit 'Em Up, When Love Takes Over, and Nadia Ali

Anyways, thanks a bunch!!! CrowzRSA 22:28, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Feedback from Curly Turkey

Learned how to play every song on this album. Took me all of twenty-nine minutes ;) Still one of my favourites.

Lead

• "the debut studio album": since they didn't have a live or other type of album before this one, this is overspecification—just go with "album"

• Fixed

• "by the American punk rock band the Ramones": you could drop the "the"; and personally I'd just label them "rock" at this point

• Fixed, but I did not simply put rock because the album and band are both known to be pioneers of punk rock.

• "Craig Leon to produce for the Ramones": not "produce the Ramones"?

• Fixed

• "to record their first album": maybe just "the album"?

• Fixed

• "with a four-track rendition of the devices": I don't understand what this means

• Fixed

• "The album was completed after Leon added overdubbing and doubling, which were both more advanced methods of production.": I get the feeling this sentence could be tightened up with a rewrite

• Rewritten

• "featured the four members": "features"—it has never ceased to feature them

• Fixed

• "Despite the record company's paying only $125 for the front photo, the artwork has become one of the most imitated album covers of all time.": I don't like the "Despite"—whether or not it became iconic is irrelevant to the price paid

• Fixed

• "which failed to include backing vocalist Mickey Leigh": well, they couldn't have included a person. "identify"? "credit"?

• Fixed

• "promoted with two singles, but they both failed to chart": don't like this "but"—most singles fail to chart.

• Fixed

• "based in the United States, but two were booked in Britain.": don't like this "but" either—nothing's being contrasted. Replacing with "and", or rewriting, would be better

• Fixed, but you may want to check it out

• "The album's lyrical themes center around violence, male prostitution, drug use, and Nazism": I'm one of those pricks who gets worked up over "center around"...other than that, the wording makes it seem like each of these themes reappears through the album. Did any song other than "53rd and 3rd" deal with male prostitution? Maybe something like: "Violence, drug use, relationship issues, humor, and Nazism were prominent in the album's lyrics." The thing is, the relationship stuff and humor were all over the album, but it's remembered for the violence, drug use, and Nazi imagery.

• Fixed

• "the band's most recognizable songs": or "recognized"?

• Fixed

• "tracks are noticeably uptempo": of course it's noticeable—that's why you're noting it. Drop "noticeably"

• Fixed

• "with many songs clocking at well over 160 beats per minute": "clocking" may be a bit informal for an encyclopaedia article

• I used "measuring" instead of "clocking"

• "Ramones also contains a cover of": "also" is superfluous; you mght want to link [[Cover version|cover]]

• Removed and linked

• "Ramones was deemed influential by many critics": "was deemed"? At the time? Influence happens after the fact. I'd rewrite he whole sentence, and have contemporary reviews precede later critical assessment

• Rewrote, may want to see if it reads okay now.

I may or may not return to look through the rest of the article.

———Curly Turkey (gobble) 00:12, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

• Thank you so much for the review on the lead, I'll probably be able to attend to it later today. If you do return to further review the article, much of the comments at FAC were focused on the "Reception" section as well as the "Lyrics and compositions" section. Nonetheless, thank you! CrowzRSA 16:24, 3 March 2014 (UTC)