Wikipedia:Peer review/I've Failed You/archive2

I've Failed You

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because...GA attempt. typos, malformed ideas, anythihng that needs pointing out (besides more external sources for music ig) please do.

Thanks, Chchcheckit (talk) 15:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You always got those reference ideas on the talk page you can use. TheWikiToby (talk) 02:16, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

True, but the refs are moreso random notes i have found. if i can't or don't need to tie them in, i don't. shrug. Chchcheckit (talk) 15:41, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After a quick skim: I do not notice any immediate concerns. If there are no more sources that you can use for the article, I suggest nominating this to WP:GAN. Z1720 (talk) 01:49, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bluecrystal004

I have two general comments (I'm not really familiar with any particular requirements for music articles, so these are just skimming the prose), but besides that I agree that the article looks good to be nominated at WP:GAN.

The second paragraph of the lead needs a rewrite basically. When I first read it I was like "what does all this have to do with the album??" - I would recommend first just adding a quick couple words that the tour was promotional for the album; I'm not sure that Jenkins' and Doan's membership is relevant to include in the lead?; and there could be some more comments summarizing the critical reception - why did it get mixed reviews?
For my taste, there are just too many lengthy direct quotations from the band members and critics and if I were reviewing for GAN I would definitely ask for a lot of those to be paraphrased instead
The first sentence of "Music, writing and recording" feels like it mistakenly got in the wrong section - it should be included in the reception section

Like I said, besides those issues, I didn't notice anything significant in the prose. ~Bluecrystal004^{(talk · contribs)} 20:31, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

things have been rectified. the second paragraph ignores membersjip, i wanted it for chronologys sake but at the same time ig its fine. the quotes have been reduced somewhat. and the genre problems that led to the metal hammer thing have been solved, plus content Chchcheckit (talk) 02:22, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]