A Crow Looked at Me is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 10, 2021. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The album appeared at number 18 on his AOTD list, should that be included in the article? 6equj5 2444 ( talk) 23:57, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
should the live album (after) be mentioned. If so where?
Should the poem be presented as how it is now or in its original formating?
Popcornfud, BLZ, Moisejp; DMT biscuit has put in serious work here, and is looking to put at FAC. They have had two PRs, with limited success. IMO it needs a thorough copy edit yet, and oversight on tone re reviews etc. Calling in the heavies as think this article has grand potential if we all pitch in. Obv its a great great album, with a more than touching backstory. Ceoil ( talk) 14:11, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Ceoil, flattered to be included among the "heavies". :-) I hope you're all well. I don't have much Wiki time these days, and can't promise, but I will sincerely try to chip in. This article looks interesting and as you say has good potential. Moisejp ( talk) 22:26, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
P.S. Hey Ceoil, cool, this article mentions Julie Doiron. She's the bassist in that Eric's Trip "View Finder" video you said you liked. Moisejp ( talk) 04:17, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Starting my own section here to avoid cluttering general discussion
ref=harv
to each "cite" template to make them usable as Harvard citations. Again no pressure, just a possible option to consider if you'd like to give it a shot.Hi DMT Biscuit. I totally agree with BLZ for #2 for all the reasons he gave. Of course, it could very much be considered a matter of preference, so like he said, there's no pressure from me either. But, yeah, I'd say if you're aiming for FA, why not make it as clean, neat, and flexible as possible, and easier to manage/navigate as both as an editor and a reader? Just a suggestion. :-) Moisejp ( talk) 00:33, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi. I am familiar with Harv ref system (I've worked on Anarchism) and do intend to add it (this was something i considered before as you could see in the edit history of this talk page.) I've placed a major edit tag at the top.
BLZ, Moisejp, — sparklism, It's been a bit of time since the copyright issue was first brought to attention, with Elverum himself seemingly unresponsive. I as such ask if we should undergo with its removal? DMT biscuit ( talk) 19:58, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
@ Brandt Luke Zorn:,@ Moisejp:,@ Sparklism:,@ Ceoil: CITE SWITCH IS DONE. finally. It was a rewarding experience. I can't guarantee that the ICs are perfect so feel to give them a comb-over—I will in the mourning.
So rounding off this assessment, I want to bring you attention to the reception section. This part has been brought up as in need of a rewriting but personally speaking, I can't see any glaring issues. I suspect this is due to bias, so I want to get yours input. Thanks. DMT biscuit ( talk) 23:16, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi @ DMT biscuit:. I hope you're well. Until now I've been too busy to look at this hardly at all, but now I'm on my Christmas holidays, and I'm pretty sure I'll have some time. I started reading the article in earnest just now, and I noticed some things I'd like to suggest. I'll probably have time to give a "full review". I notice the article has already had two peer reviews—sorry I missed them. I don't know if you'd want to start a third one; if you do, I'd promise to leave at least some comments there, maybe more than just some. To be honest, I've only read the first part so far, and am only guessing I might have a proportionally similar number of comments for the parts I haven't read yet. Anyways, if you don't want to open another peer review, another option is I could just leave the comments here on the talk page. If I end up having lots and lots of comments, though, it could get possibly too long for a usual "talk page comments" section (but, as I hinted at above, the reverse is also possible, and if you open a peer review, it's possible I could have fewer comments than I thought). Just let me know. Cheers, Moisejp ( talk) 08:27, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
As discussed above, I'll put my comments here:
Lead:
Background and composition:
I liked your changes! I made a couple more suggested small edits. I'll try to get to looking at the next section very soon. Moisejp ( talk) 17:07, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Music and lyrics:
By the way, just to let you know, now that the winter holidays are over I'm going to have less Wiki time. I would like to keep chipping away at my edits and comments here, but I hope you don't mind if it's not speedy going. I'm juggling looking at this with a couple of other projects I have on the go. From what I've read so far, this article looks really good, and if you're patient enough to let me slowly work my way to the end—and assuming everything in the second half is about equal quality as the first—I expect I will be supporting when you take it to FA. Cheers, Moisejp ( talk) 06:59, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Apologies for my slowness. Will try to get a good chunk today if I can.
Before I get any farther, could I make a big comment that I'd say there are too many quotations in the Reception section? I would definitely suggest trying to paraphrase at least half or more of them. Also, are there things people said that are similar enough, or share some elements, whereby you could combine two or more reviews into a single sentence? For example, "Both X and Y commented on such-and-such aspect of the album; X additionally noted/opined that..." Or "Some reviewers found that (such-and-such). X elaborated that..." Maybe the reader doesn't need to know every nuance of what each reviewer said. It's great that you have already grouped the paragraphs by general theme, but are there opportunities to further combine the statements to highlight slightly more specific trends in what reviewers mentioned? Honestly, the section is for me currently a little long and choppy (choppy in that it's one sentence per reviewer-point). What I'm suggesting now would also help to trim out unneeded details and make the section smoother. To find points to combine, if necessary you could also look at details the reviewers said that are not currently included in the article; there might be other usable tidbits in their reviews that can be clumped into mini-trends?
I apologize that I'm throwing this big comment at you so late in the game. It's truly because I've been so busy I've only had small windows of time to work my way through the article line by line, and so didn't really have a chance to look at the Reception section until now. Again, sorry about that. Moisejp ( talk) 03:29, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Moisejp ( talk) 04:02, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure when I'll have a chance to look at this again but I would say if you address my last batch of comments then the article is in pretty good shape prose- and comprehensiveness-wise. (Ideally I would have liked to look at your sources too, but not sure I'll have time; I hope someone else may have a chance to delve into that.) So if you address my last batch of comments, I would be inclined to support the article at FAC (assuming it doesn't change too much between now and then). Cheers, Moisejp ( talk) 18:56, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi @ Brandt Luke Zorn:,@ Moisejp:,@ Sparklism:,@ Ceoil:. Upon further reading and looking over, I find the accolades to be quite aesthetically unpleasing and hard to read. This is, in my opinion, due to it being prose and so having the references in rapid succession. As there a few examples listed I wonder if it would be better converted to tables such as those seen in Loveless (album), 1989 (Taylor Swift album), Today (The Smashing Pumpkins song). I feel that because only select publications are noted, these tables wouldn't be too obstructing. Thanks. DMT biscuit ( talk) 17:11, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 20:22, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
@ DMT biscuit: I see that you reverted my repairs to the referencing errors in this article. Is there a reason that the error messages in the article are desired? Do you have a plan for fixing them soon? I'm also wondering why this article has a "Citations" section, which is redundant to the "References" section. What is the rationale for listing references in two different places? -- Mikeblas ( talk) 02:28, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by DMT biscuit ( talk • contribs) 23:29, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
As somebody who edits primarily on paintings and painters, it kills me so say this, but I think the article has too many images. Apart from text squash, some of the more tangential images distract from the impact of the more significant and relevant images and quote boxes. Also...maybe putting them ll in is opposite to the ultra minimalist spirit of the album. Straight up would loose File:Gary Snyder, Mark Kozelek, Julie Doiron, Karl Ove Knausgård, Will Oldham,Joanne Kyger.jpg, which squashes down the most affecting part of the article text. Ceoil ( talk) 19:52, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Re sources, the following are in the sources but not in the references...Joyce, Colin (VICE), "10 Things You Should Do This Labor Day Weekend (and Beyond), '"A Crow Looked At Me by Mount Eerie". P.W. Elverum And Sun, while Christgau 2018 is used inline, but not named in the sources. Ceoil ( talk) 23:53, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
In the section Tracks 1-7, do you think the inclusion of a photo of Hadia Gwaii would be beneficial?? Considering it's a significant presence in two songs and mentioned multiple times in the article. DMT biscuit ( talk) 01:23, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
I have completed a requested copy edit of this article. Here's a diff showing all of my edits. I tried to leave detailed edit summaries explaining what I did, and sometimes why. I left one "clarify" template in the article following a sentence that I was unable to make heads or tails of and that did not appear to match the content of the cited source. I will not be watching this page, but feel free to ping me if you have questions or concerns about my editing choices. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 18:17, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Related, the following sources are not used inline (this could be a nitpicky issue at FAC):
The article hass been given a very through and skilled reworking by DMT in the last few months. I'm confident now that it is FAC worthy, and would have my support if that happened. Ceoil ( talk) 18:21, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Folks, apologies if I have missed this somewhere, but I can't see any reference to Pitchfork's 2017 album of the year accolade. The table currently has the reader's poll included, but not the writer's one. I'd say this is fairly significant, and worthy of inclusion. I haven't added it myself because I'm not familiar with the citation style used here and don't wanna mess it up - can someone add it please? Thanks :) — sparklism hey! 10:12, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
A Crow Looked at Me is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 10, 2021. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The album appeared at number 18 on his AOTD list, should that be included in the article? 6equj5 2444 ( talk) 23:57, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
should the live album (after) be mentioned. If so where?
Should the poem be presented as how it is now or in its original formating?
Popcornfud, BLZ, Moisejp; DMT biscuit has put in serious work here, and is looking to put at FAC. They have had two PRs, with limited success. IMO it needs a thorough copy edit yet, and oversight on tone re reviews etc. Calling in the heavies as think this article has grand potential if we all pitch in. Obv its a great great album, with a more than touching backstory. Ceoil ( talk) 14:11, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Ceoil, flattered to be included among the "heavies". :-) I hope you're all well. I don't have much Wiki time these days, and can't promise, but I will sincerely try to chip in. This article looks interesting and as you say has good potential. Moisejp ( talk) 22:26, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
P.S. Hey Ceoil, cool, this article mentions Julie Doiron. She's the bassist in that Eric's Trip "View Finder" video you said you liked. Moisejp ( talk) 04:17, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
Starting my own section here to avoid cluttering general discussion
ref=harv
to each "cite" template to make them usable as Harvard citations. Again no pressure, just a possible option to consider if you'd like to give it a shot.Hi DMT Biscuit. I totally agree with BLZ for #2 for all the reasons he gave. Of course, it could very much be considered a matter of preference, so like he said, there's no pressure from me either. But, yeah, I'd say if you're aiming for FA, why not make it as clean, neat, and flexible as possible, and easier to manage/navigate as both as an editor and a reader? Just a suggestion. :-) Moisejp ( talk) 00:33, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi. I am familiar with Harv ref system (I've worked on Anarchism) and do intend to add it (this was something i considered before as you could see in the edit history of this talk page.) I've placed a major edit tag at the top.
BLZ, Moisejp, — sparklism, It's been a bit of time since the copyright issue was first brought to attention, with Elverum himself seemingly unresponsive. I as such ask if we should undergo with its removal? DMT biscuit ( talk) 19:58, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
@ Brandt Luke Zorn:,@ Moisejp:,@ Sparklism:,@ Ceoil: CITE SWITCH IS DONE. finally. It was a rewarding experience. I can't guarantee that the ICs are perfect so feel to give them a comb-over—I will in the mourning.
So rounding off this assessment, I want to bring you attention to the reception section. This part has been brought up as in need of a rewriting but personally speaking, I can't see any glaring issues. I suspect this is due to bias, so I want to get yours input. Thanks. DMT biscuit ( talk) 23:16, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi @ DMT biscuit:. I hope you're well. Until now I've been too busy to look at this hardly at all, but now I'm on my Christmas holidays, and I'm pretty sure I'll have some time. I started reading the article in earnest just now, and I noticed some things I'd like to suggest. I'll probably have time to give a "full review". I notice the article has already had two peer reviews—sorry I missed them. I don't know if you'd want to start a third one; if you do, I'd promise to leave at least some comments there, maybe more than just some. To be honest, I've only read the first part so far, and am only guessing I might have a proportionally similar number of comments for the parts I haven't read yet. Anyways, if you don't want to open another peer review, another option is I could just leave the comments here on the talk page. If I end up having lots and lots of comments, though, it could get possibly too long for a usual "talk page comments" section (but, as I hinted at above, the reverse is also possible, and if you open a peer review, it's possible I could have fewer comments than I thought). Just let me know. Cheers, Moisejp ( talk) 08:27, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
As discussed above, I'll put my comments here:
Lead:
Background and composition:
I liked your changes! I made a couple more suggested small edits. I'll try to get to looking at the next section very soon. Moisejp ( talk) 17:07, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Music and lyrics:
By the way, just to let you know, now that the winter holidays are over I'm going to have less Wiki time. I would like to keep chipping away at my edits and comments here, but I hope you don't mind if it's not speedy going. I'm juggling looking at this with a couple of other projects I have on the go. From what I've read so far, this article looks really good, and if you're patient enough to let me slowly work my way to the end—and assuming everything in the second half is about equal quality as the first—I expect I will be supporting when you take it to FA. Cheers, Moisejp ( talk) 06:59, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Apologies for my slowness. Will try to get a good chunk today if I can.
Before I get any farther, could I make a big comment that I'd say there are too many quotations in the Reception section? I would definitely suggest trying to paraphrase at least half or more of them. Also, are there things people said that are similar enough, or share some elements, whereby you could combine two or more reviews into a single sentence? For example, "Both X and Y commented on such-and-such aspect of the album; X additionally noted/opined that..." Or "Some reviewers found that (such-and-such). X elaborated that..." Maybe the reader doesn't need to know every nuance of what each reviewer said. It's great that you have already grouped the paragraphs by general theme, but are there opportunities to further combine the statements to highlight slightly more specific trends in what reviewers mentioned? Honestly, the section is for me currently a little long and choppy (choppy in that it's one sentence per reviewer-point). What I'm suggesting now would also help to trim out unneeded details and make the section smoother. To find points to combine, if necessary you could also look at details the reviewers said that are not currently included in the article; there might be other usable tidbits in their reviews that can be clumped into mini-trends?
I apologize that I'm throwing this big comment at you so late in the game. It's truly because I've been so busy I've only had small windows of time to work my way through the article line by line, and so didn't really have a chance to look at the Reception section until now. Again, sorry about that. Moisejp ( talk) 03:29, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Moisejp ( talk) 04:02, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure when I'll have a chance to look at this again but I would say if you address my last batch of comments then the article is in pretty good shape prose- and comprehensiveness-wise. (Ideally I would have liked to look at your sources too, but not sure I'll have time; I hope someone else may have a chance to delve into that.) So if you address my last batch of comments, I would be inclined to support the article at FAC (assuming it doesn't change too much between now and then). Cheers, Moisejp ( talk) 18:56, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi @ Brandt Luke Zorn:,@ Moisejp:,@ Sparklism:,@ Ceoil:. Upon further reading and looking over, I find the accolades to be quite aesthetically unpleasing and hard to read. This is, in my opinion, due to it being prose and so having the references in rapid succession. As there a few examples listed I wonder if it would be better converted to tables such as those seen in Loveless (album), 1989 (Taylor Swift album), Today (The Smashing Pumpkins song). I feel that because only select publications are noted, these tables wouldn't be too obstructing. Thanks. DMT biscuit ( talk) 17:11, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 20:22, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
@ DMT biscuit: I see that you reverted my repairs to the referencing errors in this article. Is there a reason that the error messages in the article are desired? Do you have a plan for fixing them soon? I'm also wondering why this article has a "Citations" section, which is redundant to the "References" section. What is the rationale for listing references in two different places? -- Mikeblas ( talk) 02:28, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by DMT biscuit ( talk • contribs) 23:29, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
As somebody who edits primarily on paintings and painters, it kills me so say this, but I think the article has too many images. Apart from text squash, some of the more tangential images distract from the impact of the more significant and relevant images and quote boxes. Also...maybe putting them ll in is opposite to the ultra minimalist spirit of the album. Straight up would loose File:Gary Snyder, Mark Kozelek, Julie Doiron, Karl Ove Knausgård, Will Oldham,Joanne Kyger.jpg, which squashes down the most affecting part of the article text. Ceoil ( talk) 19:52, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Re sources, the following are in the sources but not in the references...Joyce, Colin (VICE), "10 Things You Should Do This Labor Day Weekend (and Beyond), '"A Crow Looked At Me by Mount Eerie". P.W. Elverum And Sun, while Christgau 2018 is used inline, but not named in the sources. Ceoil ( talk) 23:53, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
In the section Tracks 1-7, do you think the inclusion of a photo of Hadia Gwaii would be beneficial?? Considering it's a significant presence in two songs and mentioned multiple times in the article. DMT biscuit ( talk) 01:23, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
I have completed a requested copy edit of this article. Here's a diff showing all of my edits. I tried to leave detailed edit summaries explaining what I did, and sometimes why. I left one "clarify" template in the article following a sentence that I was unable to make heads or tails of and that did not appear to match the content of the cited source. I will not be watching this page, but feel free to ping me if you have questions or concerns about my editing choices. – Jonesey95 ( talk) 18:17, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Related, the following sources are not used inline (this could be a nitpicky issue at FAC):
The article hass been given a very through and skilled reworking by DMT in the last few months. I'm confident now that it is FAC worthy, and would have my support if that happened. Ceoil ( talk) 18:21, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Folks, apologies if I have missed this somewhere, but I can't see any reference to Pitchfork's 2017 album of the year accolade. The table currently has the reader's poll included, but not the writer's one. I'd say this is fairly significant, and worthy of inclusion. I haven't added it myself because I'm not familiar with the citation style used here and don't wanna mess it up - can someone add it please? Thanks :) — sparklism hey! 10:12, 4 February 2021 (UTC)