Jump to content

Talk:Tin Machine (album)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleTin Machine (album) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 7, 2021Good article nomineeListed
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tin Machine (album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:56, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Tin Machine (album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 11:45, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

I can see you've nominated a lot of album GANs during these times, I will take the first Tin Machine one on now! --K. Peake 11:45, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

[edit]
  • Should you write Bahamas or The Bahamas since the city article uses the former but the country one uses the latter?
  • The former
  • Actually lists with less than three items can be separated by a comma, but for consistency's sake I agree; fixed.
  • Remove wikilink on studio album
  • "American guitarist Reeves Gabrels and American brothers" → "American guitarist Reeves Gabrels and brothers"
  • "whom he hadn't worked" → "neither of whom he had worked"
  • Above done
  • "was hired to produce." → "was hired to help with production."
  • Changed to "co-produce"
  • Should you write Bahamas or the Bahamas since the city article uses the former but the country one uses the latter?
  • The former
  • November and December are not directly sourced in the body
  • "The band named themselves" → "Tin Machine named themselves"
  • Done
  • The unlike part is not sourced anywhere in the body
  • "in interviews promoting the album." → "in promotional interviews."
  • Done
  • Critical reception should come before commercial performance in the second para
  • Why? As far as I know, there is no written or unspoken rule that says otherwise. Besides, CP and release are combined here so it would make even less sense to split them here. – zmbro (talk) 18:03, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since critical reception is supposed to be followed by commercial in the body, shouldn't it be this way in the lead too? Also, you don't need the "upon release" part so that can be removed if you switch the order. --K. Peake 09:35, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It normally does but here, honestly for quite a majority of Bowie's records, there isn't enough info to warrant a CP section so I combine that with release. So sure I could switch the lead but if I did that it would match the flow of the actual article, because that's not changing. – zmbro (talk) 17:24, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Tin Machine peaked at" → "the album peaked at"
  • "of the album's tracks." → "of the tracks."
  • "the album received mixed reviews" → "Tin Machine received mixed reviews from music critics"
  • "to receive mixed assessments" → "to receive similar assessments"
  • "The band began recording" → "Tin Machine began recording"
  • Above five done

Background

[edit]
  • Shouldn't David Bowie be wikilinked on the quote box?
  • "he began to" → "Bowie began to"
  • "he decided the best" → "Bowie decided the best"
  • "he was did was" → "he did was"
  • "of "Lucy Can't Dance", and" → "of "Lucy Can't Dance" and" because normal English is used in Anglo-American articles, like you have with the phrase "criticise"
  • All fixed

Development

[edit]
  • Img looks good!
  • "the tour's American leg;" → "the American leg;"
  • Keep as the demo if the tape was for one song, if not change to the demos
  • "Gabrels unique guitar" → "Gabrels' unique guitar"
  • "presented Gabrels music" → "presented Gabrels with music"
  • "the two composed" → "Bowie and Gabrels composed"
  • "providing input and feedback." → "providing equal input."
  • [13] should be invoked every two sentences in the area it is used
  • "he told Buckley" → "Palmer told Buckley"
  • All fixed

Recording and production

[edit]
  • Done
  • "set his drum set up" → "set his drum up"
  • "overpowered the room leaving" → "overpowered the room, leaving"
  • "The band urged Bowie" shouldn't this be "the other members of Tin Machine" since he's part of the band? If it is the backing band, then use "they" here instead
  • "that the album was" → "that Tin Machine was"
  • Above three done
  • Img looks good!
  • "the band recorded was" → "Tin Machine recorded was"
  • "with the band sometimes" → "with Tin Machine sometimes"
  • Above two done
  • Mention that the sessions moved to Compass Point Studios in November 1988
  • I figured it out. November & December were listed before I started expanding this article. Well none of the biographers mentioned those months. O'Leary lists August–October 1988 and February–April 1989 while Trynka gives the recording dates as "August 1988 – spring 1989", which I went with as that's more in line to what Pegg states. – zmbro (talk) 17:34, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "recalled being a" → "recalled as being a"
  • "John Lennon's son Sean Lennon visited" → "John Lennon's son Sean visited" per MOS:SAMESURNAME
  • "drug use throughout the city," → "drug use throughout Nassau," because it has been too long since you last wrote the name
  • "in the 1970s as" → "in the mid-1970s served as" per the source
  • "The band recorded" → "Tin Machine recorded"
  • "material recorded (but not released) by the band" → "material recorded yet not released by them" since the statement is not large enough to properly warrant brackets
  • "like Tin Machine" → "liked Tin Machine" per the tense
  • "Gabrels's suggestion for the album name" → "Gabrels' suggestion for the title" because the italics make it clear you mean album name
  • "making the album, saying" → "making Tin Machine, saying:"
  • "was sure the band would" → "was sure they would"
  • Above done.

Music and lyrics

[edit]
  • "art rock,[31] and" → "art rock and" moving [31] to the end of the sentence before [32]
  • Wikilink blues rock
  • "on "Bus Stop", and" → "on "Bus Stop" and"
  • "describes the music as" → "described the music as"
  • "that other albums" → "which other albums"
  • "James Perone calls it" → "James Perone calls the music"
  • "the band's approach to" → "Tin Machine's approach to"
  • "Jon Pareles of The New York Times states" → "Jon Pareles of The New York Times stated" with the wikilink
  • "He notes that, with the exception" → "He noted that, with the exceptions"
  • "including neo-Nazism ("Under the God") and drugs ("Crack City")." → "including neo-Nazism and drugs on "Under the God" and "Crack City", respectively." to flow smoother
  • "describe the album's songs as the band" → "describe the songs as Tin Machine"
  • All done

Release and promotion

[edit]
  • "The album's cover artwork" → "The cover artwork for Tin Machine"
  • "describes give them" → "describes as giving them"
  • "who is unsure of what he wants to do next." are you sure this shouldn't be worded in the past tense?
  • Above done
  • "of the record and band," → "of Tin Machine and the album of the same name,"
  • Too many words; keep it "of Tin Machine and the album"
  • Are you sure this is specific enough about the title since wrote the album on the last instance? Also, I just spotted the usage of Palmer in this section and if that's not Robert then change to Tim Palmer since Robert was the last person of this surname mentioned. Regarding the instance in live performances, keep as Palmer if the one referenced here is Tim and if not, then write his full name there per previous. --K. Peake 09:35, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "at Bowie's new" → "regarding Bowie's new"
  • "to the album's cover that informed" → "to the cover informing"
  • "the label released" → "EMI America released"
  • "on 22 May 1989[7][35] on" → "on 22 May 1989,[7][35] issuing" to avoid overusage of "on"
  • Above four done
  • Shouldn't the Norway and Sweden positions be mentioned too, as they were top-10?
  • "Short-term sales of the album" → "Short-term sales of Tin Machine"
  • Done
  • "by Bob Dylan, was" → "by Dylan, was" since he is the only person of this surname mentioned in the article
  • Changed to "Dylan's "Maggie's Farm""
  • [51] should be solely at the end of the para because it is used for the last two sentences
  • Pipe "Prisoner of Love" to Prisoner of Love (Tin Machine song)
  • Remove "in October" after the following month because September is mentioned in the previous sentence
  • Above three done

Music video

[edit]
  • "by a 13-minute" → "with a 13-minute"
  • "clips of songs from the album, with each song" → "clips of the songs, with each one"
  • Remove comma after (1986)
  • Above three done

*"EMI planned an" → "EMI America planned an"

  • "to ten minutes" → "to 10 minutes" per MOS:NUM
  • Done

Live performances

[edit]
  • "while recording the album, and then made" → "while recording Tin Machine, before making"
  • "the band embarked on" → "they embarked on"
  • Both done
  • "received mixed reviews, with critic Alastair McKay writing" → "were received with mixed reviews; critic Alastair McKay wrote" but the source does not actually back up that the reviews were mixed; it only displays this one
  • Fixed
  • Pipe Herald Scotland to The Herald (Glasgow)
  • "was released digitally" → "was released for digital download and streaming" with the pipes, adding streaming per the source
  • "The digital-only release, called" → "The release, called" and add a comma after the title
  • "was mastered by Tim Palmer." → "was mastered by Palmer."
  • "the band took a" → "Tin Machine took a"
  • "in late 1989" → "during late 1989" to avoid overly close uses of "in"
  • Add release year of Tin Machine II in brackets
  • "a new solo tour, the" → "his new solo tour the"
  • Above eight done

Critical reception

[edit]
  • Retitle to Reception, as the second para is rankings rather than reviews
  • Done
  • Shouldn't you note in brackets that Christgau's review was for the Consumer's Guide?
  • "received generally mixed reviews" → "was met with generally mixed reviews"
  • "it would quickly" → "the album would quickly"
  • Both done
  • After the above sentence with a mixed one, the reviews seem to not have a proper flow; shouldn't you place positive and negative ones in their respective areas?
  • "with Q magazine calling it" → "with Q magazine calling the album" but are you sure you can't name the reviewer? If not, then write "a reviewer for" instead
  • "Don Waller of" → "Don Waller of the"
  • "welcoming "a couple" as a" → "welcoming "a couple" as"
  • "summing up the album by" → "summarising the album by"
  • "frequently surpass Bowie."" → "frequently surpass Bowie"." per MOS:QUOTE
  • Pipe the McClatchy Company to McClatchy
  • "called the band" → "called Tin Machine"
  • "that showed that" → "that showed how" or something similar to avoid overly close usage of "that"
  • "the main criticism of the record" → "the main criticism of Tin Machine"
  • "to fans. "I guess" → "to fans: "I guess"
  • "would place Tin Machine on" → "would place the album on"
  • "as chosen by a numerouos" → "as chosen by numerous"
  • Above done (that last one is embarrassing)

Legacy

[edit]
  • Done
  • "were exploring styles of" → "were exploring styles of"
  • Wikilink proto-grunge per MOS:LINK2SECT
  • "and had it been released" → "and had the release been"
  • "felt it was a" → "feels it was a"
  • "and felt that it lost the charm that made Bowie's earlier solo efforts special." → "and believes the special charm of Bowie's earlier solo efforts was lost."
  • "it an album that's" → "it an album that is"
  • Above five done
  • "considered the best song" should be kept like this if he only expressed the statement once; if consistent, change to considers

Track listing

[edit]
  • the former's sequencing → the former sequencing – since this is one of two sequences listed and is for more than one release
  • Done

Personnel

[edit]
  • Good

Charts

[edit]
  • Add Billboard in brackets for Top Pop Albums

References

[edit]
  • Copyvio score looks pretty good at 32.0%!!!
  • Wikilink The Independent on ref 5
  • Shouldn't you invoke ref 29 in place of the other Perone refs since the former already cites the pages?
  • Cite Radio.com as publisher instead for ref 27
  • Author-link Jon Pareles on ref 37 and fix MOS:CAPS issues
  • Shouldn't you invoke ref 64 in place of ref 41 since the former already cites p. 346?
  • Ref 49 is missing a publisher
  • Pipe Herald Scotland to The Herald (Glasgow) on ref 57
  • WP:OVERLINK of Rolling Stone on ref 59
  • Shouldn't you invoke ref 1 in place of ref 73 since the former already cites p. 411?
  • Pipe EMI America to EMI America Records on ref 74
  • All done

Sources

[edit]
  • Good
[edit]
  • Good

Final comments and verdict

[edit]
  • Kyle Peake All done. Resolved the OR issues and have a few questions above. Thanks again for reviewing. You've honestly turned into a pretty damn good reviewer. Although we don't see eye-to-eye on everything, I think you've really helped me in areas I've missed (esp. on Low) and I end up getting annoyed with myself that I still make basic errors; but we're only human. Keep up the great work. :-) – zmbro (talk) 17:37, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Zmbro ✓ Pass time, I copyedited in the suggestion where I forgot to write my idea and a reference to the Daft Punk song was expected when you mentioned us being human, thanks for the kudos and I feel like you've helped me with my style as a reviewer somewhat. --K. Peake 20:27, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tin_Machine_(album)&oldid=1211519398"