Talk:Symphonic Odysseys

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Symphonic Odysseys/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Red Phoenix (talk · contribs) 13:09, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

I'll start working on this one today. I've always loved video game music articles and have dabbled with a couple myself. That being said, I'm quite unfamiliar with this particular concert, so this should be an interesting read. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 13:09, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Some prose issues, read section-by-section breakdown.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Some concerns, read section-by-section breakdown

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Coverage is nice and deep considering the subject. Extensively covers the production, concert, resulting album, and reception. A little touch-up will really set this in; notes to follow in the section-by-section breakdown.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Good use of expressing all points of view, including positive and negative reviews in the reception. Article reads smoothly and I can't see any WP:NPOV issues.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Article hasn't been edited since August. That's a pretty good indicator of how stable it is.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Images are good

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Section-by-section breakdown

Lead

• The lead should really summarize all of the article's main points. As such, I feel it's a little light on the production and could use another sentence or two about it, especially with how much of this article's content is on the production.
• General setup is good, info box is good, just missing that detail. No other concerns.

Concert

• "composer specific" - per MOS:HYPHEN, this should be hyphenated as a compound modifier.
• "music from Square Enix" - Music from the company or from their works? May want to clarify this in the sentence to help readers who may not be familiar with Square Enix or their list of titles.
• "The subtitle of the concert was later changed to "Tribute to Nobuo Uematsu".[5] Uematsu is a Japanese video game composer, best known for his work at Square Enix including the Final Fantasy series; his compositions had been a significant component of the Symphonic Fantasies concert." I have two concerns with this combinations of sentences:
  • Ending a sentence and starting the next one with the same word, in this case the name Uematsu, reads awkwardly in terms of sentence fluency. They could plausibly be combined to eliminate the repetition (my recommendation), or reworked in another fashion.
  • Given this is Uematsu's "tribute concert", can a little more be said about him? I'm not saying it needs a full paragraph or anything like that, but all we really get is that he's known for his work with Square Enix, including Final Fantasy. Maybe something can be said about how many titles he's worked on? Or, preferably and probably even more useful, why was Uematsu in particular chosen to be honored? It's mentioned that the choice for another composer-specific event was because Uematsu wanted to hear a concert of his music, but it doesn't really say why the composers chose to do a concert for Uematsu's music; or at the very least, it seems unclear to me as I read this article. I feel that's the only thing keeping me from saying this article meets 3a at this point.
• Be consistent with italics; Symphonic Odysseys is not italicized in every occurrence throughout the section.
• Starting three sentences in a row with "The" (at the end of the production section, and again in the show section) doesn't read well for sentence fluency, if you can mix that up a bit.
• "Grave-Allegro" is used in the prose, but "Grave - Allegro" is used in the table. Make sure to be consistent.
• How come there's a mention of the concert being broadcast on the radio in the lead, but nothing in the show section? There's no citation for this fact, nor is it mentioned in the body, where it really should be mentioned.

Album

• Remember to avoid using "The" to lead off multiple sentences in a row. This will improve sentence fluency.
• Otherwise this section is well done.

Reception

• Only concerns I really have here are on the reliability and credibility of some of these references. Comments on specifics will be in the reference review below.

Image review

Use is good. Copyrighted images are used appropriately and contain fair-use rationales. Adequate number used as well for subject identification.

References (no spot-checks)

• What makes Maz Sound Tools a reliable source?
• Little sketchy on RPGFan, is it a reliable source?
• Same with GameMusic.net, what makes it reliable?
• Formatting is good, no concerns with any reference citations.

Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 21:08, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Alright, addressed all of the above. In regards to your reference questions: Maz Sound Tools is the music retailer/publisher that published the Symphonic Odysseys album in Europe. RPGFan is an RS that I've used in FAs and FLs before; they have editing and fact-checking on all of their articles, have been around for 16 years, have been cited by other RSs and had their quotes used on box covers and game trailers. GameMusic.net is a Polish game music site with dedicated editors, not user-submitted, that focuses a bit more on European game music but has interviews with dozens of people including Masashi Hamauzu, Hitoshi Sakimoto, Nobuo Uematsu, Christophe Héral, Chris Hülsbeck, etc. --PresN 01:35, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Well done. I'd say my concerns have been addressed (and all in one big edit, as a matter of fact). Very nicely done, and thanks for the explanation on the sources. I'm confident enough in this article's quality to award it GA status. Congratulations. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 03:34, 5 November 2013 (UTC)