Talk:Industrial Zen

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Industrial Zen 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

Industrial Zen 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 16, 2017. (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

Jazz Low‑importance

	Jazz portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jazz, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of jazz 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.JazzWikipedia:WikiProject JazzTemplate:WikiProject JazzJazz articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tags

I've added several tags to the article, mostly for fidelity to sourcing. I hope that the recent GA nominator or reviewer can address these. EddieHugh (talk) 11:18, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Later... how did this pass as a GA? The sources can't have been checked: I've found problems with most of what I've looked at. It has the potential, but fidelity to sources is disastrous as it stands. EddieHugh (talk) 13:47, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disastrous? I don't think so... But I'd be happy to address any concerns you have. I'll go tag by tag to discuss this with you:

"amateur drummers" → this can easily be removed and I will remove it. It was more a title than anything; considering "English Jazz musician John McLaughlin", do I also have to cite that his citizenship is English and he is primarily a jazz musician? – No, it's just a broad statement.
"Yamaha keyboard" →
"English rock band Pink Floyd.[5][not in citation given]" → This was purely my mistake, it stated this in the AllMusic review and it looks like I left out the source.
"touching, conversational dialogue.[1][dubious – discuss]" → I reworded this so you can tell me if this better suits the source.
"sensitive" → this was in the Jazzwise review but I just removed it.
"Continuum and features bassist Hadrien Feraud" → I was careless and this was once again my error. It looks like I left out the AllMusic review (which backs this claim) on two occasions so I need to be more careful here.
"constant" → Well, ostinato is a sound that is constant but I removed it too.
"familiarities between the record and his music from the 1970s.[4][not in citation given]" → I thought this summarized nicely what was stated in the beginning of the AllMusic review but I will remove it. Carbrera (talk) 17:29, 16 April 2017 (UTC).[reply]
"and featured too much modern jazz music.[1][dubious – discuss]" → Actually I reverted my changes to this statement.

@EddieHugh: I also took care of a few other things that you mentioned in your edit history. I hope this appears better to you. Carbrera (talk) 17:41, 16 April 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for the swift changes. "Amateur" is close to derogatory in musical circles. Good point on "ostinato", although it renders "constant" redundant. It's much better now. I removed 2 refs that weren't the best for what was left and made another couple of changes. It's easy to get sources mixed up; I've done it plenty of times. I used to put single words in quotation marks, too, but was told that it really wasn't necessary... unless it's something unusual or otherwise noteworthy, I either change to a synonym or use the original word. EddieHugh (talk) 18:41, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Glad this could be cleared up. Carbrera (talk) 18:42, 16 April 2017 (UTC).[reply]

@EddieHugh: Thank you for raising these concerns, and I apologize for missing them in my review. Aoba47 (talk) 00:33, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]