Talk:Four More Respected Gentlemen/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: BennyOnTheLoose (talk · contribs) 10:46, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

• Copyvio check - I reviewed all matches over 3% found using Earwig's Copyvio Detector. No concerns - matches are titles. Similarly, no concerns from the couple of offline sources that I checked.
• Image - FUR is OK. Image is relevant.

Background

• Optionally, expand slightly on "In September 1967, the Kinks issued their album Something Else by the Kinks in the UK" - e.g. add some info like "English rock band", year they formed, Something Else by the Kinks being their fifth UK studio album

• I expanded it a bit, including "English rock band" and "fifth UK studio album".

• Having looked at Bandleader, I don't think there would be much to be gained by wikilining it.

• Agreed.

• "Davies initially thought about making a solo LP, but as recording sessions persisted into June 1968, his idea merged into plans for the Kinks' next studio album" - it doesn't seem quite right to say that the "idea merged", unless this about the concept for an album rather than the solo v group issue.

• Hinman uses the word "mutated", so I paraphrased it into "merged", but now that you point it out I see that it isn't a helpful description. I've changed it to "evolved".

History

• The Neill quote box text could perhaps be converted to prose in the body text instead, but not a blocker to GA status to keep as-is.

• I think I'd like to keep it, as it helps break up the text nicely.

Content

• "Johnny Rogan" can be just "Rogan" as he's mentioned in the previous section.

• Done.

Track listing

• Looks slightly odd to have a notes section for the track listing straight before the Notes section for the article, but I dont have a better option. (No action required.)

• I'd reorganize it differently if I could, but I think it's best to have the track listing notes right there lest we make it harder to find for the reader.

Notes

• No issues.

References

• Spot check on "a situation which resulted in confusion for the band's fans" - OK.
• Spot check on "Johnny Rogan simply writes it was stopped while Reprise waited for Village Green's UK release" - OK
• Spot check on "In his 1994 autobiography, Ray Davies writes the album was going to be called Four More Well-Respected Men" - OK
• Hinman & Brabazon (1994) seems like an OK WP:SPS, given that Hinman (2004) is from an established publisher and Hinman appears to be well-regarded. The other sources all look OK.

• Yes, I've included Hinman & Brabazon's book because I think it meets Wiki's standard for using a SPS. As you mention, Hinman was later published by a reputable publisher. Additionally, he is recognized as the leading Kinks expert by numerous authors. Andy Miller's book (2003), Peter Doggett's liner notes to Village Green's 1998 reissue and Dave Davies's autobiography (1996) all cite his 1994 book when they produce dates, since the 2004 one was not yet published. Miller also describes Hinman & Brabazon's book as "the standard Kinks' reference work and a truly magnificent feat of diligence and research" (p. 146). Academic Carey Fleiner includes it in the further reading section of her 2017 book The Kinks: A Thoroughly English Phenomenon. She adds that next to the 2004 book, it is "[a]nother top reference tool" which "[c]omplements Hinman's other work on the Kinks" (p. 204).

Infobox and lead

No issues with NPOV. Breadth and depth seems fine given what I saw in some of the sources. I made one trivial script-suggested edit - if there's any reason to revert it, feel free to do so. Thanks for your work on the article, Tkbrett. I only have a couple of minor points above. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 12:11, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the review BennyOnTheLoose. Responses above. Tkbrett (✉) 19:33, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm satisfied that the article meets the GA criteria, so I'm passing it. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:47, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.