Talk:Love It to Death/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Retrohead (talk · contribs) 18:37, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Glad to review an article I'm interested in. General note, the track listing and other tables/schemes should be preceded by the prose per WP:MOS-ALBUM#Article body.--Retrohead (talk) 18:37, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking this. I've reordered the sections. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:20, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
- Vincent Furnier should be linked in the first mentioning in the 'Background'.
- Done. (I think I want to keep the duplink later at "Cooper went solo", though; I don't think it's clear they link to hte same thing. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 00:12, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- You think during is more suitable than "While at the "?
- I think "during" would imply that it happened while the performances were actually happening; whether Gordon contacted Richardson during the performances is not clear from the sources. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 00:12, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hard rock songs sounds more encyclopedic than "hard-rocking songs". (second paragraph of 'Recording and production')
- rather than the following–the seems extra
- Oops. Fixed. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 00:12, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- Can you drop Rolling Stone from the table since its favorable review is mentioned in the prose and lose the Christgau grade from the prose because it is present in the table? Or on the other hand, you can lose the entire table and state the marks in the prose. I'm vying for the second.
- I've actually dropped the table entirely, because it was causing formatting problems. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 00:12, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- Kim Gordon's image kind of ruins the aesthetics of the page with all that blank space between the 'Legacy' and the track listing. Having essays titled after an album track is not "reasonable" enough to warrant an illustration. If you ask me, in some way it contradicts the other pictures which are all black-and-white.
- It wasn't just an essay, though; the book title was Is It My Body as well, and Sonic Youth covered the song with Gordon on vocals. I've commented out the image for now; hopeful something new will happen to fill in that section more so I can add the image back without all the white space. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 00:12, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- The prose and comprehensiveness of this article are worlds above the other good article from Alce Cooper's albums–Billion Dollar Babies. Great job on this one! I'll return tomorrow to check the sound files, images, and references, but I doubt we'll have problems with those.
- Images are under free license, and the use of the cover art is properly justified. Sound quality and duration is according to the song's length and WP:SAMPLE. You might add a "Db-f1" template at the top of File:Alice Cooper I'm Eighteen.ogg for admins to delete the old version which is not used.
- I'm sure it's not something that will be disputed, but it's common practice to have an information where the personnel is taken from (booklet, Allmusic, etc.)
- Okay, I've added a ref to AllMusic. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:03, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- About the cover, was it modified on the reissues? The caption from the infobox suggests so.
- Yes---this is discussed in the third paragraph of the "Release and reception" section, which talks about censored versions (there were also other modified versions of the covers, such as ones that declared "I'm Eighteen" was on the album, but I didn't think that was worth mentioning). Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:03, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- I've altered the caption to "Original, uncensored album cover". Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:09, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- Yes---this is discussed in the third paragraph of the "Release and reception" section, which talks about censored versions (there were also other modified versions of the covers, such as ones that declared "I'm Eighteen" was on the album, but I didn't think that was worth mentioning). Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:03, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- I haven't found irregularities at the references either. The majority of them are books and magazine articles, which are acceptable even under FA.
- Regarding the cover, my idea was to omit the description since we don't have the censored art.
- Okay, since the page meets the GA criteria, I'm ready to pass it. Apologies if you expected more constructive notes, but as far as the criteria go, this article is well beyond them.--Retrohead (talk) 10:41, 15 January 2015 (UTC)