Talk:The High End of Low/GA2
Latest comment: 7 years ago by Freikorp in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 14:15, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- Is it reasonably well written?
- "Chris Vrenna (Nine Inch Nails) and Rob Holliday (The Prodigy)" - Do you think it's necessary to specify their other bands in brackets? Looks a bit superfluous to me. Maybe it would look better if you specified these bands in prose rather than brackets, as seems to be the style in the next two sentences.
- Removed.
- 'Manson's fantasies about "smashing [Woods'] skull in with a sledgehammer."' - can you expand on this at all? That's a pretty provocative statement and it makes me want to know more about the situation.
- I've elaborated on how that song is inspired by their breakup.
- As a fiercely pro-choice person I personally approve of your piping of 'anti-abortion rhetoric' to 'anti-abortion movement', but in the interest of neutrality I will mention that it very likely would be considered biased. I'll leave it up to you but I wouldn't be surprised if this is challenged in the future.
- Changed to "such as pro-war and anti-abortion rhetoric." I think I piped anti-abortion rhetoric like that because of the link to pro-war rhetoric. Or would it be better to change this to "... referencing various aspects of neoconservatism in its lyrics, such as pro-war rhetoric and anti-abortion policies"?
- That suggested wording does sound better. Freikorp (talk) 05:42, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
- Changed to "such as pro-war and anti-abortion rhetoric." I think I piped anti-abortion rhetoric like that because of the link to pro-war rhetoric. Or would it be better to change this to "... referencing various aspects of neoconservatism in its lyrics, such as pro-war rhetoric and anti-abortion policies"?
- Should Artists and repertoire be abbreviated? Why not just mention the full title?
- Done.
- "anybody's [sic]" - assuming that's a typo from Rolling Stone rather than Twiggy (I presume Rolling Stone conducted a verbal interview and then transcribed it) I think you should just type it up correctly.
- Done.
- "much [the soon-to-be-murdered-in-their-home press] believe in their freedom of speech" - once I read the original source I could see how this bracketed statement makes sense, but just reading it on its own is confusing. I'm not sure if there's much you can do about that, I just thought I should mention it.
- I removed the part in brackets, and rephrased the whole thing slightly.
- "week figure since live album" - I think you could use a 'the' in between 'since' and 'live'
- Done.
- Can you link to an archived snapshot of the official website in the external links section?
- It was a flash-based website, so archive.org couldn't properly copy it. And the only archive.is save is just a redirect to Universal Music's webpage. So I've had to remove it altogether.
- "Chris Vrenna (Nine Inch Nails) and Rob Holliday (The Prodigy)" - Do you think it's necessary to specify their other bands in brackets? Looks a bit superfluous to me. Maybe it would look better if you specified these bands in prose rather than brackets, as seems to be the style in the next two sentences.
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- The lead mentioned multiple editions of the record being released. While this is clearly the case as indicated by the track listing section, I was expecting to see further coverage of it in the prose. Can you find anyone commenting on these multiple releases?
- I've had a look around, but couldn't find anything. Should I remove that sentence from the lead? I remember putting that there as filler anyway, because that first paragraph of the lead looked a bit lop-sided with just 3 sentences. I'm sure I'd be able to remove it and fill it back out again with something sourced.
- No if you can't find anything that's fine. Freikorp (talk) 05:42, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
- I've had a look around, but couldn't find anything. Should I remove that sentence from the lead? I remember putting that there as filler anyway, because that first paragraph of the lead looked a bit lop-sided with just 3 sentences. I'm sure I'd be able to remove it and fill it back out again with something sourced.
- The lead mentioned multiple editions of the record being released. While this is clearly the case as indicated by the track listing section, I was expecting to see further coverage of it in the prose. Can you find anyone commenting on these multiple releases?
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail: Very impressive work. Looking forward to passing this once minor issues have been addressed. Freikorp (talk) 03:00, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
- Happy for this to pass now. Well done. Freikorp (talk) 05:42, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
