From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

Reviewer: ErnestKrause ( talk · contribs) 18:29, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply


Starting review process, it may take a couple of days if needed. ErnestKrause ( talk) 18:29, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Lead section

  • Phrase in lead section: "The album was the band's American breakthrough, where marked the..." This punctuation of a comma does not seem to fit. Wording may look better with some adjustment. ErnestKrause ( talk) 19:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Background

Composition

  • The songs in this section are normally offset by commas. One comma before the song title followed by one comma after the song title for nearly every song mentioned in this paragraph. This offsets the song titles and makes the text easier to read. ErnestKrause ( talk) 19:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Release

  • Since you already have the Charts section in the article, then you might think about just removing the charts info from this section. If you have any of the marketing promotion information with reliable cites for the album's release, then it might look good to see it in this section. ErnestKrause ( talk) 19:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Accolades

  • The phrase looks better with a comma after it: "For their single "Virtual Insanity"". Prepositional phrases, which you seem to like using in this article usually use a comma to offset them from the main part of the sentence. ErnestKrause ( talk) 19:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Legacy


Controversy

Personnel

This section might look better higher up in the article's Table of Contents. ErnestKrause ( talk) 19:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply


That should get things started and let me know if any of the above needs clarification. ErnestKrause ( talk) 19:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply

I have most of these addressed. I decided to make controversy into a subsection in release. I didn't remove the info about the charts even though it already has its own tables. I often see the same information as also a prose version. I don't remember where I've learned it or who told me, but it's generally a standard in album articles. The personnel section is higher up in the article. I feel like the notes subsection in the tracks section gave a bit of confusion. 웃 O O 04:57, 6 February 2022 (UTC) reply
Concluding: That looks like a better version of the article. Optionally, the Personnel section usually appears higher in the Table of Contents than the Legacy section and you might switch their places in the Table of Contents. Also, one image of the personnel somewhere in the article might look nice to go along with the sports car image you already have. Passing article. ErnestKrause ( talk) 15:01, 7 February 2022 (UTC) reply
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

Article ( | visual edit | history) · Article talk ( | history) · Watch

Reviewer: ErnestKrause ( talk · contribs) 18:29, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply


Starting review process, it may take a couple of days if needed. ErnestKrause ( talk) 18:29, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Lead section

  • Phrase in lead section: "The album was the band's American breakthrough, where marked the..." This punctuation of a comma does not seem to fit. Wording may look better with some adjustment. ErnestKrause ( talk) 19:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Background

Composition

  • The songs in this section are normally offset by commas. One comma before the song title followed by one comma after the song title for nearly every song mentioned in this paragraph. This offsets the song titles and makes the text easier to read. ErnestKrause ( talk) 19:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Release

  • Since you already have the Charts section in the article, then you might think about just removing the charts info from this section. If you have any of the marketing promotion information with reliable cites for the album's release, then it might look good to see it in this section. ErnestKrause ( talk) 19:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Accolades

  • The phrase looks better with a comma after it: "For their single "Virtual Insanity"". Prepositional phrases, which you seem to like using in this article usually use a comma to offset them from the main part of the sentence. ErnestKrause ( talk) 19:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Legacy


Controversy

Personnel

This section might look better higher up in the article's Table of Contents. ErnestKrause ( talk) 19:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply


That should get things started and let me know if any of the above needs clarification. ErnestKrause ( talk) 19:15, 5 February 2022 (UTC) reply

I have most of these addressed. I decided to make controversy into a subsection in release. I didn't remove the info about the charts even though it already has its own tables. I often see the same information as also a prose version. I don't remember where I've learned it or who told me, but it's generally a standard in album articles. The personnel section is higher up in the article. I feel like the notes subsection in the tracks section gave a bit of confusion. 웃 O O 04:57, 6 February 2022 (UTC) reply
Concluding: That looks like a better version of the article. Optionally, the Personnel section usually appears higher in the Table of Contents than the Legacy section and you might switch their places in the Table of Contents. Also, one image of the personnel somewhere in the article might look nice to go along with the sports car image you already have. Passing article. ErnestKrause ( talk) 15:01, 7 February 2022 (UTC) reply

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook