Talk:Black Lab
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Copy-edit
I've made some minor changes to the document, namely capitalization, grammar, and spelling fixes. It's a surprisingly comprehensive look at the band's history, and I tried not to mess with the author's intended words because they're obviously much more informed than I, but the document should "work" a little bit better now. I also added a short description of what the MP3 club is all about at the end. ChronoSquall14 09:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Working toward GA
I've left a series of inline messages to address some ways to expand/improve this. FYI to any editors involved. --badlydrawnjeff talk 16:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- I would dearly like to pass this as a GA, but it's one in front of mine in the list, and people might see it as cheating to push mine up the scale. Bugger... andreasegde 19:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] GA review
The article looks good, but there's a few things to fix:
- The Music section contains fair use album covers. According to the fair use criteria, these serve a purely decorative purpose and shouldn't be present. (I had the same situation with the Pixies' discography section). You could place some of the album covers in the appropriate section of the biography. (criteria 6)
- The first paragraph in the lead should detail who's in the band, and what instruments they play (a reader has to scroll down to the Members section to easily find this). I don't think the lead is sufficient in that respect. The 'Past members' section could be merged into the infobox (see Pearl Jam for how to handle a long list of past members). (criteria 1b)
- What's the band's musical style? I don't think the article address this major aspect. There seems to be plenty of reviews of the band's work, so you shouldn't be stuck for sources. Even a short section will do fine. (criteria 3a)
A minor stylistic issue, but you may want to change the background colour according to Template:Infobox musical artist.
Hopefully that'll be enough for now :) Leave me a note on my talk page when you feel you've addressed these issues. CloudNine 15:47, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Point 1 taken care of; pics integrated into body of article.
- Point 2 - Added Past Members section to infobox; kept members section at bottom. Is this OK?
- Point 3 - I added a few general details supported by the reviews I'd cited into the sections for the first two albums. It's very difficult to describe the band's style after their first album without veering into OR territory, as they did not receive any mainstream press reviews for any of their independently released albums. I personally might liken it to a darker, edgier Coldplay or Snow Patrol, but that's pure OR. How does it read now? Chubbles 20:38, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'm passing this as a good article. I appreciate your concerns about the musical style, and realised writing such a section is not as easy as I first thought. You may want to add some audio samples though. CloudNine 14:52, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Name info
I removed the following addition:
- From unnamed source close to the band: Actually, the name comes from the band's first rehearsal studio, which was windowless and without air-conditioning. They'd turn off the lights to keep the heat down. All that was left were the indicator lights on the sound gear, giving the room a faint eerie glow in the darkness while they created the songs. So it was like a lab. It was after this that references to Black Sabbath, Stereolab and the dog breed came. (The postcard Paul sent his mailing list in 1996 announcing the new band said, "Paul Durham unleashes... Black Lab!") Stereo Sabbath was also once the name of the band's fan club, and would show up on random, hand-labeled tapes handed out at shows during the 1997-98 tour.
If anyone can dig up a source that talks about this, I'd like to re-add it. Chubbles 01:24, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Black lab cover1.png
Image:Black lab cover1.png 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)