Talk:Commontime (album)/GA1

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: MikeOwen (talk · contribs) 20:40, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Good job on all of your work on Field Music articles: I'm really impressed at the amount of work put into it and how enjoyable reading the articles are. I've read the article, and will start the review tomorrow or the day after as I go through the article again. mike•owen discuss 20:40, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the delay, my schoolwork is taking up more time than I though. I'll start writing on a few sections and then continue on the rest later. Sorry about that. mike•owen discuss 10:31, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Infobox

Background

Musical style and composition

Pop, funk, other genre influences

  • "The album's songs encompassed" → "The album's songs encompass"
  • Changed. — Hunter Kahn 21:28, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "There are references to just about every genre you can think of here, from funk and R&B to classical and glam rock, all bound together with the Brewis’ usual wiry textures.": the source here apparently doesn't exist. If you can find where it's gone, that would be great, or find an archived version. Also wikilink the genres mentioned in the source.
  • "indie pop"; "alternative rock"; "chamber pop": I'm not entirely sure if the "styles" section of AllMusic is reliable, since I think it's user-generated. I'm not entirely sure, but I'll look into it more. WP:RSMUSIC states that the genre sidebar on AllMusic is not reliable "as it is generated from a separate source from the prose," so you need to either find another source or remove the genres (except for the one where there are two sources listed).
    • I didn't know that, so it's good to know! I've added sources for the others, but had trouble immediately finding one for "alternative rock", so for now I've removed it. This article refers to the fact that they are often called alternative rock, but it might not tie it directly enough to Commontime to be used. Let me know if you think that one works; otherwise I'll just keep that genre out... — Hunter Kahn 21:28, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Britpop": the Daily Express is not a reliable source according to WP:RSPSOURCES
    • Didn't realize that either. I've removed all uses of that source (the only other thing I had to remove was the review blurb from the publication). I don't have another source for Britpop reference so I've removed it for now. This article mentions Britpop but wanted to run it by you for your opinion before adding it because 1) I wasn't sure if it was a reliable source and 2) it mentions Britpop in connection to one song more than the album as a whole, so I wasn't sure if you thought it would be an appropriate use? — Hunter Kahn 21:28, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It featured progressive rock elements" → "It features progressive rock elements"
  • "and featured him on vocals" → "and feature him on vocals"
  • ""Same Name" featured" → ""Same Name" features"
  • ""Don't You Want to Know What's Wrong?" featured" → ""Don't You Want to Know What's Wrong?" features"

Hall & Oates, American number-one singles

Unusual time signatures, vocal harmonies

Guitars, strings, brass instruments

  • "Ben Philpott described "The Morning is Waiting" as a "grand, luscious production..." → "Ben Philpott considered that "The Morning is Waiting" had "grand, luscious production..." since it is referencing its production and stuff, not the song.
  • "A ballad," → remove the comma
    • The only reason I had a comma here at all was because WP:CITEFOOT says "citation markers are normally placed after adjacent punctuation such as periods (full stops) and commas", and also because, while I agree the comma isn't necessary, I don't believe the sentence is grammatically correct with it there either. That being said, I don't feel strongly, so for now I've removed it. WP:CITEFOOT only suggests citation markers follow a full stop and doesn't require it so I think we're still OK, but if you think the comma should be re-added because of that, I'm fine either way. — Hunter Kahn 23:34, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "A Peter Brewis composition": I'm not entirely sure if the source exactly states that it is by Peter Brewis, since it's a bit vague and might have something different to do with Peter, like it might just be a song very special to him rather than one specifically composed by him. I might be stretching though.
  • "begins with a slow guitar" → ""begins with a hazy guitar" since it's more in line with the source.
  • "shifting to an energetic tempo, and a" → "shifting to an energetic tempo and a"
  • "alternating between synth-backed ballads, harmonized vocals, and soft piano interludes": The ballads bit of it seems a bit weird, considering it's one song.
  • "more examples of the band utilizing danceable grooves" → "more examples of the band utilising danceable grooves" since that is the usual British spelling (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/utilize)

Lyrics and themes

Parenthood and family

  • ""The Morning is Waiting For You" is a lullaby Peter wrote to his young son." → "The Morning is Waiting For You" is a lullaby Peter wrote for his young son." (although this isn't much of a big deal, I just think it's better, especially since the sources say that, rather than to).
  • "line form" → "line from"
  • "When Peter first played the song for his son, he was two years old, and did not like it" → "When Peter first played the song for his son, who was two years old, he not like it" (I just think the prose would be better like that)

Growing into middle age

Politics

Other themes

Recording and production

Release

  • "The first tour stop was at The Cluny in Newcastle on 25 February": the first source I take in good faith since it's offline, but I can't find anything in the second source that supports it.
    • Yeah, I'm guessing that second citation was just a misplaced tag that was leftover when I was adding and/or moving content around during the writing process. I've removed that citation since it doesn't reflect this statement. For the record, although I know you accepted the offline source in good faith, I did go back to look it up just to confirm it's stated there, and it is; here is the exact text from the article: "Field Music's national tour will begin on Thursday, Sheffield, 21, with two gigs at The Cluny in Newcastle on Thursday, February 25, and Friday, February 26, already sold out."
  • "and included subsequent" → "and the tour included subsequent" since otherwise grammatically it would make the "first tour stop" the subject, which would be wrong.
  • "increased number of backing vocals" → "increased number of backing vocals on the album" for greater precision.

Sales

Critical reception

Reviews

  • "Bill Pearis of BrooklynVegan named Commontime his favourite album of 2016": I can't really see where it says this in the article.
  • "NARC Magazine writer Mark Corcoran called the album "sophisticated, intricate songwriting" and "another remarkable feat for Field Music"" → "NARC Magazine writer Mark Corcoran called the album "another remarkable feat for Field Music" and highlighted its "sophisticated, intricate songwriting"" since I think that the album itself isn't "sophisticated, intricate songwriting" but rather includes it.
  • "called the album "Wiry but" → "called the album "wiry but": needs to be lowercase since there is no new punctuation.
  • "The Sun said the album pairs the "old spontaneous energy" of Field Music with "acute observations about everyday affairs" from the "older, wiser siblings"": The Sun is an unreliable source according to WP:RSPSOURCES.
  • "The Guardian writer Paul Mardles" → "The Observer writer Paul Mardles": review written for the Sunday version of The Guardian, The Observer (see to the left of the article title)
  • "Alexis Petridis, also of The Guardian," "Alexis Petridis of The Guardian": see above
  • "She also said the album" → "He also said the album": Petridis is male.
  • "Some reviews were more mixed, and even some critics who reviewed it positively felt the running time was slightly too long.": The latter clause seems somewhat unrelated to the rest of the paragraph. Maybe you could mention it in the previous one, and keep the first clause in this paragraph.
  • "He wrote: at no point is it necessarily bad, but it is confusing"" → "He wrote: "at no point is it necessarily bad — but it is confusing""

Prince tweet

Track listing

  • No problems

Personnel

  • No problems

Charts

  • No problems

Final comments

  • Overall I think you've done a great job of expanding and improving the article, so thanks a lot for that! Sorry about the long time it's taken for me to complete the review. The article seems to pass all six GA criteria (I was a bit concerned by the high copyvio percentage but I believe it is fine since most of the matches seem to be taken up by song name), it's very much readable, broad in coverage, insightful, stays focused, etc. I added a comment about the 405 reference, so once that's resolved the article should be good to pass. mike•owen discuss 16:56, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Commontime_(album)/GA1"