Talk:Aladdin Sane/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk · contribs) 02:33, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, I can't resist this one -- unlike Hunky Dory, this is one of my fave Bowie albums, and I did considerably more to get this to B-Class standard years ago, though not so much I think that I'm too involved to comment here. As ever I'll have to ask you to be patient while I copyedit and check new sources, but it seemed to help Hunky Dory on its way to FAC, given how that review is looking so far -- time will tell of course...! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:33, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Looking forward to it. – zmbro _(talk) 15:31, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Well written

As usual I've copyedited so generally happy with the prose; outstanding points:

The television performance helped propel the album to No. 5 on the UK Singles Chart -- UK Albums Chart?

Fixed

Also in the lineup for the album was American pianist Mike Garson, who was suggested to Bowie by RCA executive Ken Glancey as well as singer-songwriter Annette Peacock, after she declined to play the synthesiser on Aladdin Sane; Garson had played on her then-recent I'm the One album -- not sure I follow, did Glancey suggest Peacock, who declined and then Garson was offered the job?

I'll have to get back to you on this one as I don't have Cann nor Buckley on me at the moment to verify. – zmbro _(talk) 15:28, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"got the best piano sound out of any of his performances for Bowie. -- closing quotes?

Whoops, fixed

"linering echo delay" -- "lingering"?

Whoops, fixed

Lots of duplinks -- do you have the checker loaded? Note that it's probably fair enough to duplicate the song title links under Music & lyrics, but anything else is probably overkill.

Yeah I got the checker suggested to me from FunkMonk over at the Hunky Dory FAC. They should all be fixed now – I never really realized how much I overlinked until I used it.

Verifiable with no original research

Sources generally look reliable although I note there's no consensus on HuffPost in that regard. Granted we're talking entertainment rather than politics but you can probably afford to lose it anyway.

Good point there was already a ref there so it's fine without it.

Formatting-wise, as with Hunky Dory, you might see if you narrow the publication location to cities rather than countries.

These should all be fixed now, except for Moonage Daydream. I can't seem to find anything about its publisher Universe. – zmbro _(talk) 15:24, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spotcheck to follow...
- Having long ago written much of the material citing Carr & Murray, Buckley (albeit the first edition), Sandford, and Pegg (again an early edition), I can vouch for the integrity of the referencing there so I mostly checked Doggett and found no issues there. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:08, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Broad in its coverage

Seems pretty well-balanced; compared to my first read of the Hunky Dory article I wouldn't say there's too much unnecessary detail (I boldly removed a sentence or two).

Yeah I definitely have learned from that one and I would say this one is in much better shape. – zmbro _(talk) 15:24, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral/Stable

No concerns here.

Illustrated

Images appear to be appropriately licensed, I'd just consider moving Mike Garson to the Music and lyrics section (perhaps under Side one given his contribution first comes to the fore on the album's second track); I'd also left-justify so he 'faces into' the text.

Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:31, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update

Hi Ian Rose! I wasn't sure where we were at with this one – almost completely forgot about it – but imo, this one isn't ready to be a GA yet. When I originally expanded Aladdin Sane, I did so immediately after Hunky Dory. Since undertaking HD's FAC, I've realized that I overly detailed it where I had to do excessive trimming, especially in the music and lyrics section. I believe I did the same thing for Aladdin as looking over it now, the music and lyrics section is WAY too detailed. I would be happy to do some trimming but in its current state, it does not deserve to be a GA. Please let me know your thoughts on the matter. – zmbro _(talk) 23:58, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Zmbro Maybe you should reach out now to the user and request for them to close this review? --K. Peake 16:50, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kyle Peake He'll get to it when he gets to it I'm in no rush. Plus, I wanna see if he believes it's still salvageable. If not then he can fail it. – zmbro _(talk) 18:10, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi guys, and tks for your patience Zmbro... I did look at this yesterday in light of your comment above but didn't get a chance to post -- my gut feel was that this article was a bit less detailed than Hunky Dory in any case (possibly as a result of the Hunky Dory GAN) and when I checked page size I found Aladdin Sane is indeed about 700 words less than Hunky Dory, so don't think we have a serious issue there. I just want to do a bit more spotchecking and then we should be able to wrap up. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:06, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input Ian. If you don't think any major trimming needs done that's good with me. :-) – zmbro _(talk) 15:16, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Rose Everything good? – zmbro _(talk) 17:14, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tks again for your patience, Zmbro -- happy to pass now. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:08, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]