Talk:Blur (Blur album)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 20:14, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

• Hi, I will take on this review. I will leave a few comments now, and add more tomorrow. FunkMonk (talk) 20:14, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
• There seems to be some comma issues with the following sentence: "Producer Stephen Street said lead singer-songwriter, Damon Albarn had started writing"

 Fixed I feel like it has been edited now to make much more sense that previously written. Any further comments on this passage? Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 00:26, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

• Rowntree and other band members need to be introduced with full names and roles in the article text as well, not only in the intro.

 Done FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  12:14, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

• The "music" section excessively uses copyrighted quotes. Couldn't some of it be cut down and paraphrased? There are generally a lot of quotes throughout the article that could be paraphrased.

I have cut down the long ones and paraphrased in places. Does it look allright now? FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  18:11, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

• Is there a particular reason why the Blur 21 Bonus Disc tracklist needs to be hidden?

I see it's something of a convention to hide bonus tracks in other articles, so it doesn't really matter here, seems to be optional FunkMonk (talk) 16:38, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

• Do the image captions need to repeat text from the article at length?

 Fixed Seems to be allright now. FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  12:07, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

• What is a "raise-yer-mug singalong"?

Put that section in quotes for now making clear that its the reviewers words.FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  12:43, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

• The following sentence has no source: "The album features the first song to appear on a studio album in which Coxon not only wrote the lyrics, but also sang lead vocal—"You're So Great"."

 Fixed FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  17:08, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

• And that's it from me. FunkMonk (talk) 13:44, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for these comments, taking a look atm. FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  19:39, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

• There now seems to be a minor edit war going on over genres, could be good to source the info so the page could become stable. FunkMonk (talk) 18:07, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Whatever the solution, it is imperative that this edit war is stopped before the article can pass. FunkMonk (talk) 17:20, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

The edit war appears to have ended 12 days ago. What else is needed for this review to be wrapped up? BlueMoonset (talk) 17:54, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Nominator hasn't notified me here every time something was fixed, I would appreciate if "done" or such was written after each fixed suggestion. FunkMonk (talk) 18:05, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the absence as I have been busy over the past few weeks. I will try and check the last points now. FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  18:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

• It appears all issues have been fixed. The track notes could need citations, but that won't hold it back for now. FunkMonk (talk) 22:56, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Thanks a lot. FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  13:33, 2 April 2013 (UTC)