![]() | Money Jungle has been listed as one of the
Music good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: September 18, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
i was suprised there was no article on money jungle
jazz gurus please help
Image:Moneyjungle.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 23:54, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
I have changed the genre stated in the infobox back to "jazz", as several descriptions are given in the available sources, which also comment on the range of playing styles across the tracks. The question becomes whether to use all the labels that can be found (not viable or useful for a summary box), select some (subjectively), or use a superordinate. The last makes most sense to me, as anyone who wants more detail can find it in the main text. EddieHugh ( talk) 13:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: LazyBastardGuy ( talk · contribs) 02:00, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
I'll take this review. I'll be right back.
First, images, sourcing and article stability:
Next, nitpicks:
"...impressed by the freedom of individual expression within a small-group setting."
Sounds very POV.
"This was Mingus' first trio recording since 1957."
This might sound better in the lead paragraph, and/or in the next section.
"...was one example."
This should go at the beginning of that phrase, so it reads, "...one example was 'crawling around...'"
"...were first recorded for this album."
This just... doesn't sound right here. There's another reason for it I can't quite put into words, but at least one problem I have with it is it has a few too many possible meanings. Does it mean this album was the first time they got recorded? Or does it mean they were the first of this album's songs to be recorded for this album in particular?
"...have added performances of four more compositions to the original LP:..."
"Have added" should just be "feature". "To the original LP" is unnecessary.
An additional note, "Release history" should probably be moved up one section so it comes right after "Recording and music" and before "Reception and influence". I'll do a detailed breakdown of it when I get to it.
"Pianist Lafayette Gilchristis one example: hestates that..."
"...in 1963 in mono and stereo versions."
"...so the 1987 reissue on CD was on Blue Note Records."
This should say, "...and subsidiary Blue Note Records reissued the album on CD in 1987."
"...for the 2002 Blue Note CD release by engineer Ron McMaster..."
"In this release, the original ordering of the first seven songs was returned to, with the other four songs added at the end, plus four alternative takes, increasing the number of tracks to 15."
Really clunky. Should say, "On this release, the first seven songs were arranged in their original order, with the other four songs and four alternative takes placed afterward."
Only one thing here - are the catalog numbers necessary? I have never seen this on other articles, especially not GAs or FAs.
Curious... why are the original LP credits not cited while the reissue ones are?
On hold since none of this is damning enough that the nomination would need to be withdrawn.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Money Jungle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:46, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
![]() | Money Jungle has been listed as one of the
Music good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: September 18, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
i was suprised there was no article on money jungle
jazz gurus please help
Image:Moneyjungle.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 23:54, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
I have changed the genre stated in the infobox back to "jazz", as several descriptions are given in the available sources, which also comment on the range of playing styles across the tracks. The question becomes whether to use all the labels that can be found (not viable or useful for a summary box), select some (subjectively), or use a superordinate. The last makes most sense to me, as anyone who wants more detail can find it in the main text. EddieHugh ( talk) 13:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: LazyBastardGuy ( talk · contribs) 02:00, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
I'll take this review. I'll be right back.
First, images, sourcing and article stability:
Next, nitpicks:
"...impressed by the freedom of individual expression within a small-group setting."
Sounds very POV.
"This was Mingus' first trio recording since 1957."
This might sound better in the lead paragraph, and/or in the next section.
"...was one example."
This should go at the beginning of that phrase, so it reads, "...one example was 'crawling around...'"
"...were first recorded for this album."
This just... doesn't sound right here. There's another reason for it I can't quite put into words, but at least one problem I have with it is it has a few too many possible meanings. Does it mean this album was the first time they got recorded? Or does it mean they were the first of this album's songs to be recorded for this album in particular?
"...have added performances of four more compositions to the original LP:..."
"Have added" should just be "feature". "To the original LP" is unnecessary.
An additional note, "Release history" should probably be moved up one section so it comes right after "Recording and music" and before "Reception and influence". I'll do a detailed breakdown of it when I get to it.
"Pianist Lafayette Gilchristis one example: hestates that..."
"...in 1963 in mono and stereo versions."
"...so the 1987 reissue on CD was on Blue Note Records."
This should say, "...and subsidiary Blue Note Records reissued the album on CD in 1987."
"...for the 2002 Blue Note CD release by engineer Ron McMaster..."
"In this release, the original ordering of the first seven songs was returned to, with the other four songs added at the end, plus four alternative takes, increasing the number of tracks to 15."
Really clunky. Should say, "On this release, the first seven songs were arranged in their original order, with the other four songs and four alternative takes placed afterward."
Only one thing here - are the catalog numbers necessary? I have never seen this on other articles, especially not GAs or FAs.
Curious... why are the original LP credits not cited while the reissue ones are?
On hold since none of this is damning enough that the nomination would need to be withdrawn.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Money Jungle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:46, 4 February 2018 (UTC)