Talk:Aleph (album)

Aleph (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.
Review: April 6, 2019. (Reviewed version).

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 articles

Electronic music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic 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.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: John M Wolfson (talk · contribs) 02:56, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm User:John M Wolfson, and I'll be your GA reviewer. Looking through the 6 criteria:

Well-written: The prose is clear and readable enough. Y
Verifiable and no OR: I'm not sure that the reviews given support the statement that the album received "widespread acclaim", they by and large seem more descriptive than praising. Also, could you cite the track list if possible?
Broad in coverage: This is mostly satisfied, but I would like to see something about the background and production/recording of the album.
Neutral: The issues raised with the reviews also apply here, but other than that this is satisfied.
Stable: I see no obvious vandalism or edit warring in the past 50 edits. Y
Illustrated: Some illustration might be good, but the cover art is sufficient. I see it is fair-use, and the rationale is adequate. Y

Let me know if you have any more questions! -John M Wolfson (talk) 02:56, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sullay: I was just wondering if you had received my comments and had a chance to look them over. -John M Wolfson (talk) 03:21, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I just saw this. If I remember correctly, there wasn't any information (on the internet at least) about the production or recording of the album. I hope that isn't a deal breaker? I'll try finding a source for the track list, which I believe should be easy. –Sullay (Let's talk about it) 03:47, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Two reliable sources found! –Sullay (Let's talk about it) 03:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not having a background is fine, although I'm still concerned about the reviews being acclaimed. -John M Wolfson (talk) 04:03, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the album did get good reviews. But we can change that sentence if you like, it's no problem to me. –Sullay (Let's talk about it) 04:15, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely convinced that the reviews quoted are quite as acclaiming as you say they are. Perhaps stronger quotes would change my mind. -John M Wolfson (talk) 04:26, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed those issues myself and am now comfortable with passing

this article to Good Article status. Congratulations! -John M Wolfson (talk) 03:31, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Magnificent! Thank you! –Sullay (Let's talk about it) 06:59, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]