Talk:The Sound of Girls Aloud: The Greatest Hits/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Moswento (talk · contribs) 11:08, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'll be reviewing this one. I hope to post a review below within the next 24 hours or, failing that, 48. Moswento ^talky 11:08, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, this is oh-so-very-nearly ready for GA promotion, I just have a few minor queries below. It's a well-written article overall, no bias or plagiarism. The article is well-referenced to reliable sources, in an admirably conscientious and detailed way. I have a few comments on the references below, though. The article is stable. There are no other policies that it violates, as far as I can see. All looking good - great work! Once my queries are addressed, I will very happily promote this to GA. Moswento ^talky 13:40, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your replies - I am now delighted to promote this to GA. Great work! Regarding the one unresolved question below, about the album artwork - you wouldn't need a source to describe the artwork, as long as you stuck to what is obvious and non-controversial without interpretation. This would be the same as, for instance, writing a film plot summary without a source. However, such a description is not essential for GA, so I'll leave it up to you for possible future inclusion or not. Keep up the good work, and congratulations again! Moswento ^talky 08:52, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think referring to the album as "The Sound of Girls Aloud: The Greatest Hits" every time is unnecessary - in most instances, it can be legitimately shortened to The Sound of Girls Aloud.
- Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"positive reviews from music critics," - a small thing, but I think the word "music" is redundant here, as other critics would not be reviewing it
- Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"It also peaked at number 9" - for consistency, I would go for "nine" (in letters)
- Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to include 2006 after every date - this is implied
"Bandmate Nadine Coyle..." - a few queries here:
- I don't think you can assume readers will know Nadine Coyle is Irish. This should be clarified in the text.
- Before you introduce the bit about the album cover artwork, it might be worth including a sentence describing the artwork, for people who are running the text through a text-to-speech program or who, like me, browse without images by default. You could then rephrase the next sentence to something like: "According to Irish bandmate Nadine Coyle, the first draft of the artwork included only the Union Jack, but she demanded the addition of the Irish flag".
  - I can add a description, but wouldn't a source be needed for this? - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Despite this, the flag featured is not an Irish flag, but the flag of the Ivory Coast." - Without knowing more about the circumstances of the (hilarious) error, this statement is a bit OR-ish. Why say it's an Ivory Coast flag and not a flipped or upside-down Irish flag? I don't think you can go further than saying that the flag appears incorrectly on the cover.
- Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The bonus disc was also going to include "I Predict A Riot"..." - unless I'm missing something, isn't this #3 on the bonus disc?
- Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

" a cover of "What A Feeling" " - I know it's wikilinked, but might be worth stating ", from the film Flashdance" (it's also a great song, but you don't need to include that)
- Added - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Until three days before the album was manufactured, a cover of "What A Feeling" had been included on the track listing.[7] Girls Aloud had called their record label on a Friday afternoon" - I wonder if something like the following might be better: "Originally, a cover of "What A Feeling" was included on the tracklist instead of "I Think We're Alone Now", but Girls Aloud contacted the record label three days before the album was manufactured to say they would rather record the Tommy James and the Shondells song. The group recorded the song the following morning and the album was mastered three days later"
- Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This section is currently one long paragraph. I wonder if it could be split to make it easier to read? Perhaps: a) Background sentence + Limited edition release and bonus tracklist / b) Standard version release and tracklist / c) Album artwork description and (hilarious) flag blunder.
- Done - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering if some of these quotes should be shortened, or part-paraphrased. I'm particularly thinking of the Times quote (does it matter that they are "endearingly stroppy, gobby, messy girls [who] breeze and brawl"?) and the Pitchfork Media quote(s), which is definitely overlong.
- Take a look. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you could give some indication of how long the album stayed on the UK album chart after debuting at the top spot, that would be a nice, but not necessary, addition. Don't worry if not.
- Added - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As above, you don't need to add "2006" after every date
- Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

""singing and dancing glamorously to their latest tune." - I think "to their latest tune" is redundant here and can be removed
- Removed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote 5 - Discogs is a kind of wiki and is not RS. I would have thought a citation to the album liner notes would be OK for these facts.
- Take a look. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote 14 - I wouldn't insist on this, but I wonder if a reference to the Girls Aloud page at the Official Charts Company site might be a better source for both these citations?
- Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Although Amazon and iTunes are considered reliable sources for release dates, my understanding is they should be avoided if there is an alternative source (as they are in the selling-you-stuff business rather than the information business). I think it might be worth replacing these with references to Allmusic, which also includes release dates. This will not be a barrier to me promoting this to GA, but it might make me a happier person. It might improve the article, too.
- Fixed - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't notice you started the review already! Going check this today. - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 17:22, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]