Talk:Ruby Blue (album)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
 GA |
This article has been rated as GA-class on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
|
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
|
 |
Ruby Blue (album) has been listed as one of the Arts good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment. | |||
|
||||
I do not see the need for a citation to support the vocal harmonies being reminiscent of the Andrews Sisters. Should one be required, I am sure a critical review can be found to support the notion, as it was among the very first reviews I had read of the album. Unfortunately I can't remember the reviewer or publication. In any event, the mention should remain as it informs the musical context of the work. I am removing the citation needed link as it clutters the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tednor (talk • contribs) 08:25, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] GA Review
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
A very nice article, a few minor concerns, however:
- The "Credits" section should be split into two columns, one for each heading, for stylistic purposes. You can see how to do this by looking at the markup for Wade Mainer#Discography
- "After Murphy and Brydon broke up, they were still contractually obligated to record another album, which became Statues (2003)." (Background) This first part of the section is led into as if the lead was part of the body of the article. Since, per WP:LEAD, there should be no information in the lead that is not present in the body of the article, this needs to be fixed so that this section introduces most of what was in the first paragraph of the lead. Thus, although this is an unlikely scenario, if someone started reading without reading the lead, they would have no idea what's going on, as Brydon and Herbert have not been introduced, as an example. Please make sure that all facts included in the lead are also cited within the main body of the article.
- Some statements require citations:
- "The songs on Ruby Blue were gradually released on 12" vinyl EPs titled Sequins 1, Sequins 2, and Sequins 3, in January, February, and May 2005 respectively." (Background) If the EPs had their own articles, this could probably get away without a citation but, as it stands, it should be cited.
- "The three EPs and both singles used Henwood's paintings in the cover, and he later directed the music videos for the singles." (Background)
- "The performances were choreographed by Wade Robson." (Soundtrack appearances)
- For Image:Sequins1.jpg, the fair-use rationale would only be applicable for an article on the EP, not for this article. As such, it must be removed.
- For some reason, music samples always crash my computer so, while it's on hold anyways, please check to make sure the audio samples are still working.
- "The instruments, primarily brass and woodwinds,[1] are layed over sampled noises such as alarm clocks, a water cooler, hairspray and helmets." (Composition) Did you mean to say "laid over" or "layered over" here?
- Chart performance should probably be a Level 3 heading under Critical reception, rather than its own Level 2 heading.
To allow for these changes to be made, I am putting the article on hold for a period of up to seven days, after which it may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work thus far. Cheers, CP 21:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think I've done numbers 1, 2, 5, and 6. I undid some of the changes you made which went against the MoS; also, please do not change between two accepted styles by removing serial commas unless there is a specific ambiguity caused by their use. The examples in #3 do not have inline citations because they are inherently referenced to the respective primary sources. For example, nobody would dispute that the cover of an EP was done by Henwood when he is credited for it in the EP's notes. For #4, there's no reason that Image:Sequins1.jpg would be unacceptable for use in a different article, when the article specifically discusses the photo shoot and canvases. WP:NFCC only requires that it "significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic", not that the article be about the object pictured. I'm not sure why the Chart performance section would be a subtopic of Critical reception. Just from a quick look at some random composition FAs, Supernature (Goldfrapp album), Californication (album), and Hollaback Girl all use separate sections for the topic. 17Drew (talk) 07:23, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- #2 has still not been addressed. Please re-read my concern carefully. You refer to Brydon by his last name, as if he's already been introduced, but by the theory of WP:LEAD, his first name has to be included somewhere in the body of the article. This isn't the only concern surrounding that point, but it's the most obvious one. I disagree with you on #3, but I'll let it slide. For #7, I'd argue that chart performance is a direct relation to critical reception, and that this is not FA, it is GA, but I'll let it slide as well. I have updated the GA review to highlight where work needs to be done. Cheers, CP 01:49, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I think I see what you mean now. I've reworded it so that the context is still there but that someone who reads the lead first shouldn't find it too repetitive. 17Drew (talk) 06:21, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Close enough, so I'll pass it. Congratulations and thank you for your hard work! Cheers, CP 17:26, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I think I see what you mean now. I've reworded it so that the context is still there but that someone who reads the lead first shouldn't find it too repetitive. 17Drew (talk) 06:21, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- #2 has still not been addressed. Please re-read my concern carefully. You refer to Brydon by his last name, as if he's already been introduced, but by the theory of WP:LEAD, his first name has to be included somewhere in the body of the article. This isn't the only concern surrounding that point, but it's the most obvious one. I disagree with you on #3, but I'll let it slide. For #7, I'd argue that chart performance is a direct relation to critical reception, and that this is not FA, it is GA, but I'll let it slide as well. I have updated the GA review to highlight where work needs to be done. Cheers, CP 01:49, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
