This article has
failed what was probably an unwise GA nomination, recently been rated as B-class in
WP:BIO and
had a previous PR. I feel it's at a new level now, with minimal sycophancy and plenty of citations. Any input whatsoever would be appreciated; I have a goal of this achieving GA status in not-too-long.
Seegoon01:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Re: the Isis template at the bottom of the article, have you considered condensing the "Releases" section so that the box doesn't take up the width of the page? You would just need to add a <br /> between the appropriate releases, maybe after Panopticon? You could also make it three lines - but I'd at least get In the Absence of Truth on the same line (just my opinion).
Also, have you considered adding music samples. I think they add a lot to a band's article. I added them to the discography section of
Harvest; but I've seen them used a number of ways.
Hope these suggestions help. By the way, if you're interested in adding music samples in the .ogg format, try out "Power mp3 Cutter 2006 - I got it for a free trial off of cNet Downloads. It makes cutting out 30 second or less samples a breeze (which is the legal length). Also, I've got the Harvest article up for
peer review if you're interested in reviewing it.
Jamie L.00:52, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
The second sentence is long and snaky, perhaps split it. What does commonly labelled mean? It implies that they are commonly labelled "among many others", which seems a bit odd. Do you mean that they are commonly labelled as "avant garde metal, post-metal, post-rock and experimental" and have also been labelled as many other things? Needs tidying.
I've give this a little prune - it's certainly not perfect though. It's one of things that'd work best if I completely rewrote it, and I'll add that to my to do list.
Seegoon15:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Their sound has helped develop the sound of several contemporaries; namely Cult of Luna, Pelican, Tides, Rosetta, and Russian Circles - is this really lead material? I don't know the band, so it's hard to say, but the whole second paragraph seems to focus on how they've influenced others, rather than what they've done themselves. You could also get rid of "namely" and replace the semi-colon with a colon.
I agree, but I'm not entirely sure where it could be inserted into the main body of the article. I supposed it could follow the section on the albums which influenced said bands... I'll bear that in mind. Thanks.
Seegoon15:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Why is Mogwai sourced, but Tool and Justin Broadrick not?
Further on in the article, it states how Justin Broadrick has worked with them extensively and that they have toured with Tool and borrowed a member for performance in one song - I could put that information in <ref></ref> tags if you think it'd be necessary. That's one possibility - but as you recommended, I think I'm going to try to assimilate that kind of information into the "History" section, and perhaps rename it "Biography".
Seegoon18:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Again, I don't like the "see 2002 in music" (or wherever it's used later on).
Suddenly we're given information about their most recent album, even though nothing else about their releases has been mentioned in the lead. The lead should summarise the rest of the article (see
WP:LEAD).
With this, I was just trying to condense important information. I guess it'd function fine without that information, and I might remove it.
Seegoon18:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
As Turner states - "as" is redundant; is there any reason "states" is used instead of "said" ("states" makes it sound very strong).
It signified a further progression many had predicted since Oceanic - if you're going to say that "many" predicted something, it needs a cite.
The next sentence covers this I think, but I might try to find another source to cover the "many" aspect. I have one in mind.
Seegoon18:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Bands such as Tool, The Melvins, Godflesh, and Neurosis can be cited as influences to Isis' sound, - would be better as "Isis cite Tool...as influences to their sound". "can be" sounds odd.
No Isis album is as overtly diegetic as, for example, The Wall, or The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars—two prime examples of concept albums. - cite?
Hmm... I think I might take out the other albums. "No Isis album contains an overt diegesis, or story arc, instead focusing on themes as opposed to stories.[cite]" etc etc, you've got my brain working now.
Seegoon18:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
The referencing isn't consistent: they all need accessdates and the accessdates should all be phrased the same way (sometimes it's "retrieved"; sometimes "retrieved on").
I've clarified this to the best of my abilities given what I have available. It's something for the long-term, definitely.
Seegoon18:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Where available, add the dates the refs were written.
Thankyou for your input, it's invaluable. I've bolded the stuff I still have to address; once that's done, I'd appreciate you giving it a once-over. Thanks again.
Seegoon18:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
This article has
failed what was probably an unwise GA nomination, recently been rated as B-class in
WP:BIO and
had a previous PR. I feel it's at a new level now, with minimal sycophancy and plenty of citations. Any input whatsoever would be appreciated; I have a goal of this achieving GA status in not-too-long.
Seegoon01:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Re: the Isis template at the bottom of the article, have you considered condensing the "Releases" section so that the box doesn't take up the width of the page? You would just need to add a <br /> between the appropriate releases, maybe after Panopticon? You could also make it three lines - but I'd at least get In the Absence of Truth on the same line (just my opinion).
Also, have you considered adding music samples. I think they add a lot to a band's article. I added them to the discography section of
Harvest; but I've seen them used a number of ways.
Hope these suggestions help. By the way, if you're interested in adding music samples in the .ogg format, try out "Power mp3 Cutter 2006 - I got it for a free trial off of cNet Downloads. It makes cutting out 30 second or less samples a breeze (which is the legal length). Also, I've got the Harvest article up for
peer review if you're interested in reviewing it.
Jamie L.00:52, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
The second sentence is long and snaky, perhaps split it. What does commonly labelled mean? It implies that they are commonly labelled "among many others", which seems a bit odd. Do you mean that they are commonly labelled as "avant garde metal, post-metal, post-rock and experimental" and have also been labelled as many other things? Needs tidying.
I've give this a little prune - it's certainly not perfect though. It's one of things that'd work best if I completely rewrote it, and I'll add that to my to do list.
Seegoon15:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Their sound has helped develop the sound of several contemporaries; namely Cult of Luna, Pelican, Tides, Rosetta, and Russian Circles - is this really lead material? I don't know the band, so it's hard to say, but the whole second paragraph seems to focus on how they've influenced others, rather than what they've done themselves. You could also get rid of "namely" and replace the semi-colon with a colon.
I agree, but I'm not entirely sure where it could be inserted into the main body of the article. I supposed it could follow the section on the albums which influenced said bands... I'll bear that in mind. Thanks.
Seegoon15:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Why is Mogwai sourced, but Tool and Justin Broadrick not?
Further on in the article, it states how Justin Broadrick has worked with them extensively and that they have toured with Tool and borrowed a member for performance in one song - I could put that information in <ref></ref> tags if you think it'd be necessary. That's one possibility - but as you recommended, I think I'm going to try to assimilate that kind of information into the "History" section, and perhaps rename it "Biography".
Seegoon18:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Again, I don't like the "see 2002 in music" (or wherever it's used later on).
Suddenly we're given information about their most recent album, even though nothing else about their releases has been mentioned in the lead. The lead should summarise the rest of the article (see
WP:LEAD).
With this, I was just trying to condense important information. I guess it'd function fine without that information, and I might remove it.
Seegoon18:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
As Turner states - "as" is redundant; is there any reason "states" is used instead of "said" ("states" makes it sound very strong).
It signified a further progression many had predicted since Oceanic - if you're going to say that "many" predicted something, it needs a cite.
The next sentence covers this I think, but I might try to find another source to cover the "many" aspect. I have one in mind.
Seegoon18:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Bands such as Tool, The Melvins, Godflesh, and Neurosis can be cited as influences to Isis' sound, - would be better as "Isis cite Tool...as influences to their sound". "can be" sounds odd.
No Isis album is as overtly diegetic as, for example, The Wall, or The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars—two prime examples of concept albums. - cite?
Hmm... I think I might take out the other albums. "No Isis album contains an overt diegesis, or story arc, instead focusing on themes as opposed to stories.[cite]" etc etc, you've got my brain working now.
Seegoon18:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
The referencing isn't consistent: they all need accessdates and the accessdates should all be phrased the same way (sometimes it's "retrieved"; sometimes "retrieved on").
I've clarified this to the best of my abilities given what I have available. It's something for the long-term, definitely.
Seegoon18:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Where available, add the dates the refs were written.
Thankyou for your input, it's invaluable. I've bolded the stuff I still have to address; once that's done, I'd appreciate you giving it a once-over. Thanks again.
Seegoon18:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)reply