Wikipedia:Peer review/Heaven Up Here/archive1
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for May 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I've substantially expanded it and believe it has potential to be rated as a good article.
Thanks, JD554 (talk) 07:59, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting article - I know that Echo was a drum machine and once saw the Bunnymen in the lobby of a hotel (my brush with greatness) but I do not know this album. It seems fairly close to GA to me - here are some suggestions for improvement:
- A model article is useful for ideas and examples on structure, refs, style, etc. There are a large number of albums that are FA at Wikipedia:Featured_articles#Music that may be useful models
- Please see WP:LEAD the lead should probably only be two paragraphs long. The last paragraph is quite short and could probably be combined with the second paragraph. The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article: my rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way.
- Picture of the album cover has a fair use justification but needs the template {{album cover fur}}
- Provide context for the reader - for example identify the band members better in "Background". Could be just adding a word or two is enough, i.e. In the liner notes to the 2003 remastered and reissued album, [singer] Ian McCulloch ...
- In "Releases" it says It was released elsewhere on Korova's and Sire's parent company's label, WEA. but in the history table it says it was released worldwide on the Korova label - Worldwide 1981 Korova LP KOW 58320.
- Citations are generally good, but a few statements seem to need refs - The album was [originally] released on CD on May 16, 1988. for example. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref. Please see WP:CITE and WP:V
- I do not write music articles, but I have reviewed several and I have never seem separate Acclaim and Criticism sections. Criticism is just one sentence, so I would combine the two sections and get rid of the subheaders - just have them together under the "Reception" section header. Perhaps preface the negative review by something like "Not all critics' reviews were positive..."
- I would aks someone who knows more about music articles for advice on the refs - some seem to need more information.
- Please use my examples as just that - these are not an exhaustive list and if one example is given, please check to make sure there are not other occurrences of the same problem.
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 16:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)