Talk:The Make-Up

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article The Make-Up 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.

[edit] Name

Isn't the name of the band "Make Up" rather than "The Make Up"? I have several of their CD's and they all read "Make Up" rather than "The Make Up". also the Dischord Records website [1], a label that carried the band.

Well I'm going to move this article tomorrow morning. -RRR

Sorry, been in China for a while - as for this question, the band used both names on record sleeves but referred to themselves in songs usually with 'The' - so either is acceptable. --Sachabrunel 11:08, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

This entry should be edited to reflect that their first album, "Destination:Love - Live at Cold Rice" is not actually a live album. It was recorded in a studio, and "live" sounds were dubbed in later.

[edit] GA review

Here are my comments with respect to reviewing this article for WP:GA status.

Thanks for the review! I've done what I can to address the issues you raised:
  • Four paragraphs for lead is too much - refer to WP:LEAD for advice, I'd suggest three maximum.
You read my mind. I was hesitant about one of those paragraphs anyways, so it's gone.
  • Not sure about the use and wikilinking of posthumous - it leads to a disambiguation page which isn't that useful and I'm not convinced it's commonly used in this way.
It used to be linked to posthumous work, which has since been deleted. For a definition of posthumous, check out Wiktionary's definition. Although it does not mention musical groups, it is very commonly used in reference to them. (see Category:Posthumous albums) But if you're not hot on it being wikilinked the way it is, I could unlink it or link it to the wiktionary definition. Whatever you think is best.
The one thing I really object to is a link to a disambiguation page, so in my (humble) opinion, I'd remove the wikilink. The Rambling Man 11:44, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Done. Drewcifer3000 11:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
  • "Yeh-yeh" or "Yeh-Yeh"? Consistency required.
Fixed the one instance of "Yeh-yeh." (It was in the infobox, of all places. Woops.)
  • History section suffers badly from proseline, should be, max, three paragraphs nicely flowed to improve the readability.
I've reorganized things a bit, mainly moving content among the History and Recordings sections, as well as moving the Recordings section up in the article, right after History. I also tried to reword some things to improve the proseline issues, though a few paragraphs are still fairly listy (but I don't see how else to do those sentences/paragraphs).
  • "(see the "biographies" of Nation of Ulysses, Cupid Car Club, David Candy, and Weird War), " nasty. Parentheses don't help the prose, external links within the prose should be avoided, and "see the...." within prose isn't nice either.
I agree that it is oddly styled, but I think external links to other examples might be useful (in some form/style). Do you agree or think I should take them out completely?
Check out WP:EL, "Important things to remember", paragraph 2. Because the WP:MOS says no, I would either remove them or place relevant links in the External links section. The Rambling Man 11:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Done. Drewcifer3000 11:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
  • "At first glance the Make-Up might seem to be a Rascals-style, "blue-eyed soul" group, but were in reality much more complex." - sounds more like an essay than an encyclopaedic article.
Although I think it was a relevant point, I do agree with you, so I took it out.
  • Recordings section is four short paragraphs, lineprose issues again.
Check out my comments above.
  • "skronk"? Not wikilinked and not explained...
I myself find it a questionable term. I've taken it out.

I'll place the review on hold - the most serious issue is the lineprose which I think can be relatively simply addressed. Let me know when you'd like a re-review. The Rambling Man 09:21, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Drewcifer3000 09:44, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I've passed the article today following the changes made. I'm still a little worried about the short paragraphs but since complete adherence to the manual of style is not obligatory, and the rest of the article is very good, I won't let it stand in the way of the article's promotion. Good work. The Rambling Man 07:16, 30 July 2007 (UTC)