Talk:The Worship Project

Latest comment: 8 years ago by Mymis in topic GA Review
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Worship Project. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:40, 1 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:The Worship Project/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mymis (talk · contribs) 18:25, 3 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Comments by Mymis

edit

Hello, I do wish to review your article. Please note that this is my first time reviewing an article, you are welcome to disagree with my comments. Mymis (talk) 18:25, 3 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

General

edit

Introduction

edit
  • "organs and violins" → I would suggest linking the instruments.
  • "selling over 60,000 copies" → In the US or worldwide? The Release section says they sold it within a year, I think it should be included in the intro as well.
  • "In writing songs for the album, MercyMe used a basic" → A bit odd sentence structure, maybe just "MercyMe wrote songs for the album using a basic.."
  • It seems that these three long sentences about what kind of albums the band released afterwards are a bit off-topic and not very important mentioning, especially in the introduction, in my opinion. Maybe just merge it in one short sentence, like: "The band further released one independant album before making a decision to sign with a major record label."
  • I think it's important to mention the success of "I Can Only Imagine", especially that it was certified double platinum.

Background and composition

edit
  • "..released four independent records, Christian alternative rock albums that drew.." → doesn't sound like a grammaticaly correct sentece, maybe ".. records that were all Christian alternative rock albums influenced by grunge music"
  • "While playing live, however, the ba.." → I think you missed a word in this sentence, doesn't sound right. I'd suggest starting a new sentence after a word "audiences". Like, "In contrast, their covers of popular worship songs received a greater reception during their live performances, which lead the band to write and produce..."
  • "written by Millard and composed by" → mmm, not very clear what is "written" and "composed"? you meant "write lyrics" and compose music"?
    • Changed to "With the exception of "Beautiful", a song Cochran wrote the lyrics and music to, the lyrics on the album were written by Millard, while the music was composed by the entire band". Toa Nidhiki05 00:52, 4 April 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • "because it meant so much to Millard" → sounds informal
  • "The Pig Sty" → is it a recording studio?
  • "worship" → is already linked once in the section
  • "Hammond-style organs" → link "organs"

Release, reception, and impact

edit

Personnel

edit

Track listing

edit

References

edit

Further fixes

edit

The article looks way better now, would be more than happy to promote it once you adress these remaining minor issues. Mymis (talk) 15:18, 4 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I believe you fixed all the listed problems. It is a well-written article with no original research or any copyvio detected. The sources are all reliable well formatted. I am happy to promote it. Good job! Mymis (talk) 18:15, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply