GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Wasted Time R ( talk · contribs) 00:00, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm going to make a preliminary review of this GA nomination that focuses on criteria 3b, "Broad in its coverage: ... it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail." I believe this article does not conform to this requirement as it stands now. The entire "Background" section, most of the "Move to Monument Records" section, and the parts of the lede that summarize them, don't have anything to do with this album. They are biographical background that belong in the main
Kris Kristofferson article (and if any of this material isn't there already, it should be added). I would start the article with Foster signing Kristofferson to a recording contract and Kristofferson being surprised because he sounds like a frog, then Kristofferson starting to work on the album and Foster keeping some of the material with them.
For some comparisons to other debut album articles, Please Please Me, The Rolling Stones (album), and Song to a Seagull jump right into it with little or no background given. Waylon at JD's and ...And Then I Wrote give some background, but not as much as this article is giving. And what background they do give is music-focused, whereas the background given in this article is all over the place (education, military service, family, etc). The downside of repeating the same material here is that eventually it will fall out of synch with the main article, for instance corrections and improvedKristofferson (album) sources put in there won't make it to here. And if the reader just came from the main article, they get a repeat of what they have already read.
So before proceeding with the rest of the review, I would like to know your feelings about this issue. Wasted Time R ( talk) 00:00, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Regarding 1a:
Somewhere in the lede it should be mentioned that this album is in the country music genre, more or less.
In the lede, the album was reissued as Me and Bobby McGee – need a comma before this phrase and the title part should be bold as well as italic, since it is an alternate title for the article and the subject of a redirect.
The director of Monument Records Bob Beckham invited Kristofferson ... – most people would put commas around 'Bob Beckham'.
which references the negative perception of the Rolling Stones of the older generations. – it isn't clear from this wording who has a negative perception of whom. Also, 'the' should be including in the link.
then until the woman leaves the man – Since this song is famously treated as gender neutral, this might be reworded as 'then until Bobby leaves the singer' or something like that.
Foster asked Kristofferson to write the song. Foster, who shared an office building with Felice and Boudleaux Bryant, visited the couple to discuss arrangements for a song. – Arrangements for this song, that became "Me and Bobby McGee", or some other song? And the first sentence here is kind of unnecessary, because it is soon stated again. "Oh, yea. Haven't you heard of me and Bobby Mckee?" – Presumably the 'k' should be capitalized? Moreover, was Barbara McKee's nickname 'Bobby'? It's not clear to me how the name 'Bobby' entered the picture. Finally, it should be added that Foster received co-writing credit for the song.
Kristofferson protested Monument Records' decision to modify the song's lyrics – He didn't protest much if he ended up recording the modified lyric himself.
The song's arrangements were the more orchestrated on the album and include a melody that in verses shifts from the predominant use of guitar and bass to violins in slower parts. – Do you mean 'most orchestrated'? And does the melody itself change, or just the instruments that play the melody and the tempo it is played at?
In November 1970 Kristofferson won Song of the Year at the Country Music Association Awards with "Sunday Mornin' Comin' Down". – It should be made clear that it was because of Johnny Cash's recording of it that the song won, not the recording on this album.
In January 1971, he ... - typo, should be 'the'
By June 1971, Kristofferson was reported to be "almost always sold out" - is this a reference to the original album or to the retitled reissue album? If the latter, Me and Bobby McGee should be used as the name.
Regarding 2c:
Yes, the album ratings template does say that characterizing old reviews as "favorable" or whatever is OR. But I think that's hooey. It's pretty straightforward to read an old review and evaluate it a "(Favorable)", "(Mixed)", or "(Unfavorable)", and I've done it myself. I use parentheses as indicated because it helps convey that the review itself did not use those words. On the rare occasions where the sense of a review is difficult to capture, I've seen "not easily summarized" or some term like that used.
Regarding 3a:
The album was remastered and re-released on Monument-Legacy in 2001. - maybe this could be a separate paragraph, with something added about the extra tracks including on it. Were they outtakes from the album sessions, or just other tracks from the era?
The first retrospective review can come from the original 1979 edition of The Rolling Stone Record Guide, page 211. Stephen Holden gave Me and Bobby McGee two stars out of five, saying that even though the material is strong, "as a performer, he is a questionable talent" and that "his rough singing style - which is minimal, to put it charitably" soon wears thin.
Regarding 3b:
I have seen your response above, and I fully understand the point about editors working on some articles within a subject and not others. But I can't agree that "a basic summary of what brought him to be a recording artist" is relevant for this article. If it were, for example, the Please Please Me article would talk about John meeting Paul, the Quarrymen becoming the Beatles, failures to make much career progress, engagements in Hamburg, Brian Epstein finding them, failing the Decca audition, passing the Parlophone audition, replacing Pete Best with Ringo, etc etc etc. But it doesn't, nor should it.
Regarding 6a:
The fair use rationale at File:KristoffersonAlbumCover.jpg points back to the wrong article. The image is in danger of getting deleted by a bot when the two don't line up.
Anyway, I'm putting this nomination on hold. Wasted Time R ( talk) 16:11, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Wasted Time R ( talk · contribs) 00:00, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm going to make a preliminary review of this GA nomination that focuses on criteria 3b, "Broad in its coverage: ... it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail." I believe this article does not conform to this requirement as it stands now. The entire "Background" section, most of the "Move to Monument Records" section, and the parts of the lede that summarize them, don't have anything to do with this album. They are biographical background that belong in the main
Kris Kristofferson article (and if any of this material isn't there already, it should be added). I would start the article with Foster signing Kristofferson to a recording contract and Kristofferson being surprised because he sounds like a frog, then Kristofferson starting to work on the album and Foster keeping some of the material with them.
For some comparisons to other debut album articles, Please Please Me, The Rolling Stones (album), and Song to a Seagull jump right into it with little or no background given. Waylon at JD's and ...And Then I Wrote give some background, but not as much as this article is giving. And what background they do give is music-focused, whereas the background given in this article is all over the place (education, military service, family, etc). The downside of repeating the same material here is that eventually it will fall out of synch with the main article, for instance corrections and improvedKristofferson (album) sources put in there won't make it to here. And if the reader just came from the main article, they get a repeat of what they have already read.
So before proceeding with the rest of the review, I would like to know your feelings about this issue. Wasted Time R ( talk) 00:00, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Regarding 1a:
Somewhere in the lede it should be mentioned that this album is in the country music genre, more or less.
In the lede, the album was reissued as Me and Bobby McGee – need a comma before this phrase and the title part should be bold as well as italic, since it is an alternate title for the article and the subject of a redirect.
The director of Monument Records Bob Beckham invited Kristofferson ... – most people would put commas around 'Bob Beckham'.
which references the negative perception of the Rolling Stones of the older generations. – it isn't clear from this wording who has a negative perception of whom. Also, 'the' should be including in the link.
then until the woman leaves the man – Since this song is famously treated as gender neutral, this might be reworded as 'then until Bobby leaves the singer' or something like that.
Foster asked Kristofferson to write the song. Foster, who shared an office building with Felice and Boudleaux Bryant, visited the couple to discuss arrangements for a song. – Arrangements for this song, that became "Me and Bobby McGee", or some other song? And the first sentence here is kind of unnecessary, because it is soon stated again. "Oh, yea. Haven't you heard of me and Bobby Mckee?" – Presumably the 'k' should be capitalized? Moreover, was Barbara McKee's nickname 'Bobby'? It's not clear to me how the name 'Bobby' entered the picture. Finally, it should be added that Foster received co-writing credit for the song.
Kristofferson protested Monument Records' decision to modify the song's lyrics – He didn't protest much if he ended up recording the modified lyric himself.
The song's arrangements were the more orchestrated on the album and include a melody that in verses shifts from the predominant use of guitar and bass to violins in slower parts. – Do you mean 'most orchestrated'? And does the melody itself change, or just the instruments that play the melody and the tempo it is played at?
In November 1970 Kristofferson won Song of the Year at the Country Music Association Awards with "Sunday Mornin' Comin' Down". – It should be made clear that it was because of Johnny Cash's recording of it that the song won, not the recording on this album.
In January 1971, he ... - typo, should be 'the'
By June 1971, Kristofferson was reported to be "almost always sold out" - is this a reference to the original album or to the retitled reissue album? If the latter, Me and Bobby McGee should be used as the name.
Regarding 2c:
Yes, the album ratings template does say that characterizing old reviews as "favorable" or whatever is OR. But I think that's hooey. It's pretty straightforward to read an old review and evaluate it a "(Favorable)", "(Mixed)", or "(Unfavorable)", and I've done it myself. I use parentheses as indicated because it helps convey that the review itself did not use those words. On the rare occasions where the sense of a review is difficult to capture, I've seen "not easily summarized" or some term like that used.
Regarding 3a:
The album was remastered and re-released on Monument-Legacy in 2001. - maybe this could be a separate paragraph, with something added about the extra tracks including on it. Were they outtakes from the album sessions, or just other tracks from the era?
The first retrospective review can come from the original 1979 edition of The Rolling Stone Record Guide, page 211. Stephen Holden gave Me and Bobby McGee two stars out of five, saying that even though the material is strong, "as a performer, he is a questionable talent" and that "his rough singing style - which is minimal, to put it charitably" soon wears thin.
Regarding 3b:
I have seen your response above, and I fully understand the point about editors working on some articles within a subject and not others. But I can't agree that "a basic summary of what brought him to be a recording artist" is relevant for this article. If it were, for example, the Please Please Me article would talk about John meeting Paul, the Quarrymen becoming the Beatles, failures to make much career progress, engagements in Hamburg, Brian Epstein finding them, failing the Decca audition, passing the Parlophone audition, replacing Pete Best with Ringo, etc etc etc. But it doesn't, nor should it.
Regarding 6a:
The fair use rationale at File:KristoffersonAlbumCover.jpg points back to the wrong article. The image is in danger of getting deleted by a bot when the two don't line up.
Anyway, I'm putting this nomination on hold. Wasted Time R ( talk) 16:11, 3 July 2021 (UTC)