Wikipedia:Peer review/Monstercat/archive1

Monstercat

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because a group of editors, including myself, are willing to improve this page in a way that meets Wikipedia's guidelines.

Thanks, jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 21:15, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments:

I'd stick the YouTube infobox directly below the main infobox, not in the History section. Done by Jd22292 02:58, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The history section seems to spend way too much time on 2017: the label has definitely been active between 2012-2014 and 2015-2017, and some of that history should slot into this section. This section has the most potential for expansion
Singles and artists section needs sourcing Partly done; added ref for Alone. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 02:49, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the information from the Monstercat template at the end of the article, such as its official rosters, could be folded into the article as well Done with the addition of a category for Monstercat artists. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 02:50, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Needs more reputable third-party sources, not just music blogs but also national coverage to establish notability (I know Monstercat is huge but this article does not convey that).

I'd call this a C-class article until some of these changes are made. Good luck and happy editing! TritonsRising (talk) 23:27, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ramblings from Anarchyte

"Notable albums and singles" would work better as a table, similarly to every other discography article. Done by Jd22292 18:27, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Ref11 is a bare link Done by MrLinkinPark333
Unless I'm mistaken, all of the sources besides HuffPost and Forbes aren't considered the most reliable. None are listed on WP:ALBUM/SOURCE (which would also apply for other music topics, too). 2 are to MC themselves and 1 is Spotify. Partly done; the primary sources were removed, but the other sources will have to take a visit to WP:RSN for further feedback. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk)
Parts of the article are unsourced.

I'd call this a start-class or low c-class article at the moment. Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:09, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@TritonsRising and Anarchyte: All listed suggestions have been either partially or fully completed. Is there anything else that can be improved? jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 18:54, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for these reviews. I have resolved all issues. Closing. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 04:50, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]