Talk:11 (Bryan Adams album)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 11 (Bryan Adams album) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Albums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum

Rock music Mid‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Canada: Music Mid‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian music.

11 (Bryan Adams album) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 3, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

3rd and 4th single?

Contrary to what 80.212.230.96 says there is no indication that a forth single has been released from Byran Adams website, he might of been confused because a Video for "Mysterious ways" was originally on the front page of his website, its been replaced with one for "She's Got a Way".

Over the past few weeks a new video for each of the albums tracks has appeared on the website, and is going to be featured on the upcoming deluxe DVD package, the videos are not an indication the song is a single, they are previews for the DVD, unless there is other proof it should be removed.

also, as a matter of fact, according to the new posts and the official poll on bryan's official forum there actually isn't a 3rd single yet, the news postings on bryanadams.com have only offcially confirmed the first two singles. Silver007 (talk) 10:16, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:11 (Bryan Adams album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Adabow (talk · contribs) 21:35, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Done 2 dab links, 2 dead external links

Lead

Done Could do with a rewrite to form a NPOV, especially the 3rd paragraph, which is contradictory ("The album was a commercial success... the album has been viewed as a commercial failure").

Conception

Done ...it was his eleventh studio album, if you include... Don't use second person pronouns, maybe ...it was his eleventh studio album, when album x is included
Done ..significant portions of the album was produced.. were produced
Done They'd record the album.. → Vallance and Adams recorded the album..
Done ..which they'd usually carry along.. → ..which they usually carried along..
Done There are more contractions used in the rest of the article which need to be expanded

Writing and themes

Done They hooked up.. - remove colloquial language

Release

Done The finishing touches to the album was done → were done
Done B-sides are usually written with a capital 'B'
Done Write a summarising sentence for the reviews

What do you mean? --TIAYN (talk) 15:48, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I missed this one. I mean something like "11 received mixed reviews from critics." Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:22, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done "10 thousand" → ten thousand
Done All numbers less than ten should be written out in full, however I strongly recommend that you do this for all numbers below 100.

Track listing

Done Needs a reference for writers

Is that really neccessary? The source for this would be the album itself, it would be like sourcing the cover.. Second, its not usually referenced in other GAs i've seen. --TIAYN (talk) 08:16, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the album liner notes are fin to use as a source; you can use {{Cite music release notes}} Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:34, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Personnel

Done Needs a source

Is that really neccessary? The source for this would be the album itself, it would be like sourcing the cover.. Second, its not usually referenced in other GAs i've seen. --TIAYN (talk) 08:16, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Release history

Done Needs refs and completion

Is that really neccessary? The source for this would be the album itself, it would be like sourcing the cover.. Second, its not usually referenced in other GAs i've seen. --TIAYN (talk) 08:16, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Charts and certifications

Done References should be next to the chart name, not the peak position. For certifications you can place the ref in either cell.
Done Link charts
What's up with the European Albums Chart whacked on the end?
- It charted, but they don't know what position it reached..

--TIAYN (talk) 08:14, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- look like number three Adabow (talk · contribs) 08:38, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done --TIAYN (talk) 15:48, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Media

Done Does the deluxe edition cover add anything to the article? It uses the same photograph as the original, and is just recoloured. I feel it fails WP:NFCC #8.
Done The same goes for File:BA-I Thought-Video.jpg it is not discussed in the article.

There is a lot of work to do, butI will place the review on hold now. Adabow (talk · contribs) 22:18, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the amendments; I will pass the article now. Just a couple of final comments: why is the European Albums Chart not in alphabetical order? The final sentence of the lead also needs a rewrite. Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:10, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:11 (Bryan Adams album)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

Start

Y A reasonably complete infobox
Y A lead section giving an overview of the album
Y A track listing
Y Reference to at least primary personnel by name (must specify performers on the current album; a band navbox is insufficient)
Y Categorisation at least by artist and year

C class criteria

Y All the start class criteria
Y A reasonably complete infobox, including cover art
Y At least one section of prose (in addition to the lead section)
Y A track listing containing track lengths and authors for all songs
Y A "personnel" section listing performers, including guest musicians.

B class criteria

Y A completed infobox, including cover art and most technical details
Y A full list of personnel, including technical personnel and guest musicians
N No obvious issues with sourcing, including the use of blatantly improper sources.
Y No significant issues exist to hamper readability, although it may not rigorously follow WP:MOS
Y No trivia sections

I would've overlooked that one citation lacking at the top, but once that release date chart thing is cleared up, I'll re-rate this a B-status. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 14:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 05:45, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

DMY vs MDY dates

Greetings all,

I notice that this article has been tagged as {{use MDY dates}} since June of 2013. Recently, however, an IP editor 86.161.225.22 has recently been changing a few of them to the DMY format. I have reverted them to the MDY format a couple of times, but both times they have been changed back to DMY. It is my understanding that articles that are created as MDY, have external references that use MDY, and/or have strong national or cultural ties to cultures that prefer MDY, should not be converted to DMY unless there is a compelling reason to do so (or vice versa). Certainly we should be changing all of them if we change any of them; the most important factor is consistency within the article.

From what I see, the article was indeed created as MDY, and doing a spot check of the references, they seem to be about 80% MDY and 20% DMY (the UK and German references mainly). Canada's date formats, of course, are pretty much all over the map, but according to date format by country, nearly all English-language newspapers in Canada use MDY, which seems to be borne out by my reference check; Bryan Adams's own website (www.bryanadams.com) uses MDY as well. At this stage I personally do not see a reason to switch date formats; what are other people's opinions? CThomas³ (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]