Talk:Spit (album)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Tbhotch (talk · contribs). Almost a year in the queue. 07:10, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for starting a review on this article. I thought that the article would never get reviewed. Anyways, what are some things in the article that should be fixed? Statik N (talk) 19:15, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

These:

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
See below
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Resolved comments from Tbhotch

;Lead

"approached the record label's second-in-command, Jake Weiner." -> approached Jake Weiner, the record label's second-in-command.
"Weiner signed the band" -> 15 words ago you used "the band", use a synonym.
" in London, Ontario during the summer of 1999." -> same as above.
"Spit was moderately successful," -> Is no more?
The infobox mentions "Paperdoll" as a single, but there is no mention of it in the lead.
"The nu metal album has elements..." -> Spit is a nu metal album that has elements...
"mixed-to-positive" -> It received mixed or positive (or generally positive)?
You should mention Garth Richardson's production somewhere.

Background and recording

NG was acquired -> {{when}}

Music

"hip hop" -> "scream-rapped backup vocal" is not hip hop as rapping is a style and hip hop is a genre.
B-sides -> link it
"An AllMusic review" -> {{by whom}}
hatred, ignorance and sexism -> Except for hatred, it is almost a copy-paste from the source.

Lyrics

There are too many quotes here, reduce them.

Promotion, release, commercial performance and touring

I suggest spliting release and commercial performance and merge it with Critical reception (and create an independent subsection {or subsections} like Misterioso (Thelonious Monk album)#Release and reception). Leaving it as Promotion and touring.
(RIAA)[3] on -> (RIAA),[3] on
File:Kittie Charlotte music video.jpg fails WP:NFCC#8 as there is no critical analysis of the image, or the music video. Although you "cannot show a picture of a music video through only words", you can describe it. In this still, there is no educational value that is lost. Also fails WP:NFCC#1 (marked as n.a), as free pictures of Atfield might exist that can replace the image.
File:Kittie Dynamo 2000.jpg fails the same criteria.
"Spit peaked at number 79" -> {{when}}

Critical reception

"mixed-to-positive" -> Same as lead, they are mixed or positive (or generally positive).
Same as Lyrics, reduce the quotefarm.

References

2: Author missing (full name is John Huff)
6: Access date is missing.
11: Issue, volume and/or page are missing.
12: Volume and issue are missing.
13: Authors missing; 11 February 2015. Retrieved 29 April 2015. (invert them for consistency)
14: "MUST HEAR" -> "Must Hear" (WP:ALLCAPS)
16: Author and date are missing.
18: Author is missing.
20: Author and location are missing.
21: Issue and volume are missing.
28: Access date is missing.
29: Access date is missing.
32: WP:ALLCAPS.
34: "Metal Edge, June 2001" is not enough.
41: Access date is missing.
49: Access date is missing.

External links

Remove "Hello Kittie" and "Kittie Bio" as they are being used as sources.
"Category:Obscenity controversies in music" -> How?

Citation 21 doesn't need an issue or volume because it doesn't have those. It's a book. Some of the citations that don't have an issue or volume or page doesn't have issues, volumes, or pages because I couldn't find them. Citation 32's last name is actually spelled as "vanHorn". As for the obscenity controversies in music category, there's the quote in the body: "Spit was controversial because of its song titles, which made many people think that the album's songs are about sex". Statik N (talk) 00:56, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Statik N: For Citation 32 I was referring to a title, not to vanHorn. I was about to approve the GAN, nevertheless, this suddenly happened. I cannot approve an article with an edit-war and the release dates are unsourced (except for "Paperdoll" that is supported by source 40). Resolve the conflict, and ping me when it's done. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 01:49, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, Backrish and Charlotte charted on the UK Top 100. This can be mentioned. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 01:57, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All single dates are now sourced. I sourced "Charlotte" in the body. Statik N (talk) 02:33, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]