Talk:Now Only

Seeking Consensus: Accolades removal or revamp

Hi @Brandt Luke Zorn:. I've been working on this article with the intention of it going to GA. There still needs to be a good deal of effort but one area that particularly strikes me as derelict is Accolades. It is just a list of various publications with no additional commentary. As we can see in featured articles like Loveless (album), 1989 (Taylor Swift album), and In Rainbows that's not its purpose. I also don't see the examples as particularly notable, thus violating undue weight; the album doesn't crack any of the top tens and was featured on no decade lists. Due to all I've proposed, I think the section should be revamped— per consensus —or removed. Thanks. DMT biscuit (talk) 15:21, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Butting in; don't think a text list is particularly useful, when a more general statement in the reception would do. Ceoil (talk) 16:53, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

@Ceoil: Intresting. How would you propose such an addition? DMT biscuit (talk) 17:19, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

@DMT biscuit:'Now Only appeared on numerous year-end top lists by publications such as AllMusic,[60] Noisey,[67] NPR,[68] Pitchfork,[69] The Seattle Times,[70] and others. Simple as that, but not in its own section. I am more for a table in Crow, which seems to have been more widely reviewed and reacted to. Ceoil (talk) 17:25, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good, I'll wait for what BLZ has to say but it sounds like a good inclusion and thanks for your contribution on Crow. DMT biscuit (talk) 17:45, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

@DMT biscuit:. Agree, as the approach impacts both articles. Ps, re Crow, which has left a significant legacy, an approach might be something like Cut the Crap, which BLZ also worked on, and might be of guidance re structure...it tries to intertwine reception, aftermath, and legacy with on-going bio details. It would be one way to match/create thematic linkage between Crow with this album. Ceoil (talk) 18:30, 27 December 2020 (UTC)