Talk:Human After All/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Reviewer: BeatlesLedTV (talk · contribs) 00:09, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Philroc! I'd be happy to review this. I myself created List of songs recorded by Daft Punk and brought it to featured status, so I'm a bit of a Daft Punk fan you can say. I'll have my review done by tonight. BeatlesLedTV (talk) 00:09, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lead and infobox

Ref 1 isn't needed in the infobox
Change the studio to Daft House, add a break, then put Paris, France in small font (See Homework and Discovery and you'll know what I mean
I think mentioning the album's six-week creation would be appropriate.
As opposed to "with this album," I would compare it to Homework and Discovery a little bit, kind of like how the Discovery lead compares it to Homework
Second paragraph looks good

Background and structure

Some sentences where quotation marks are inside punctuation while others are outside. Choose one or the other for consistency
Not sure if the first sentence is appropriate to start a "background" section. Think it'd be better to start the third paragraph
Was it recorded in two weeks or six weeks? I've read multiple sources that say six weeks, which is also consistent with the recording dates "September – November" in the infobox
Add the year after Daft Punk's Electroma – (2006)
Concert tours do not go in italics (Alive 2006/2007)

Release and promotion

Ref 13 and 24 are the exact same.
Again, un-italicize the Alive 2006/2007 tour
Separate chart performances into their own 'commercial performance' section. Also add the other chart positions of the album, especially the number one Top Dance/Electronic chart
I would add the info in the second paragraph to 'critical reception' after all the reviews; it basically discusses the response to reception before actual reception. (This whole section can be condensed to two paragraphs)
Add AllMusic refs for the last sentence (for Musique Vol. 1 and Alive 2007)

Critical reception

Again, some sentences have quotation marks inside punctuation while others are outside. Make sure it's consistent
Add who won the Grammy award that year

Track listing

Looks good

Personnel

Make sure to cite the liner notes; section is currently unsourced
Link the artists if they have pages. Can also link things such as drum machines, synthesizers, and vocoders.
Make the items mentioned above plural, as I'm sure the duo used multiple instruments to record the album (unless the liner notes themselves state otherwise)

Remix album

Add publish date to ref 40 (18 June 2014)
Rest looks good

Charts

This section should only be reserved for the actual chart listings. Moved the sales figures to 'release and promotion'.
With the sales figures – "as of May 2013," seems kinda outdated. Think we could update these figures, especially since it's now February 2019?

Certifications

Make sure refs have access dates

References

See the toolbox. There are a ton of references that are green, blue, and there are currently three dead links. These all gotta be fixed.
I would archive many of these refs, especially ones that are websites
Change Pitchfork Media to Pitchfork (multiple refs)
Ref 57 – why does it say "HUman after all"
Make sure all refs have last name, first name; some have first last

Final comments

Overall looks good. It definitely has potential to become a GA once these issues are resolved. I'm here to help as well, so don't be afraid to ask! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 01:25, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@BeatlesLedTV: Thanks for stepping in and reviewing this article so shortly after its nomination. I have managed to fix most of the issues you found; however, there don't seem to be any publicly-available sales figures for Human After All beyond 2013. (I encountered an edit conflict when saving, and I may have reverted other user's edits; I apologize and have attempted to remerge.) Phil roc (c) 16:11, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Damn that's a shame. I think it's starting to look good to become a GA, just gonna give it a final read-through and make any small edits then I'll give it a pass! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 17:07, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. I will ✓ Pass this. BeatlesLedTV (talk) 17:13, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.