Jump to content

Talk:Adventures in Modern Recording/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 08:30, 18 March 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 will start this review later today! --K. Peake 08:30, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead[edit]

  • Refs are generally discouraged in the infobox for genres; you should write that info out in the body instead plus [2] and [3] don't call the album progressive pop (don't know about [4] since I can't access) and [3] sources electropop
    • Is Internet Archive giving you a hard time again? *Sigh* Man, it's been acting up on me too. Here's the original link of [4], it's still up: [1] HumanxAnthro (talk) 15:10, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • We actually both misinterpreted [3]. It's only describes a single track as having sections of electropop, and brings up that it has an aspect of electro-prog, not that it's of the genre. Since I couldn't find an article about "electro-prog," I went with electronic. I have removed it given the other genres of progressive are described in the other reviews. Genre names are confusing and odd, I tell ya HumanxAnthro (talk) 15:16, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • In the concept and sound section, I wrote that it was an progressive electronic album. [4] describes it as progressive synthpop, [5] describes it as "electro-prog," and [6] describes it as consisting of "electronic and progressive rock experimentations." I found these descriptors nearly synonymous and combined them. I mean, "electro-prog" pretty much means electronic progressive, because even the most experience music writers use electro to mean electronic. HumanxAnthro (talk) 15:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Background[edit]

  • Easy mistake to make writing in your native form of English for an article, but make sure to always follow that of the performer (I have had to adapt myself as a Brit editing American musician's articles).
  • "Downes' departure gave" → "his departure gave"
  • "viewpoint, Horn recalled:" → "viewpoint, with him recalling:"
  • [2] should be solely at the end of the para due to backing up all of the parts after [3]
    • Actually, [2] doesn't, and doing what you're suggesting here would cause a "not-in-citation-given" scenario. Although you may not be able to read it now since Google Books now changes what pages get previewed, ref 2 only mentions the start of recording demos and Downes' transition into Asia. Ref 3 (the trevorhorn.com feature) is the one that discusses the Buggles' fallout with Island Records, how Horn felt about it, and what new label he signed onto to get the second album produced and released.
  • "for The Buggles first album" → "for the Buggles' debut studio album" but this previous involvement is not sourced
  • "Langan, Horn, and" → "Langan, Horn and"
  • The keyboardist credit, percussion and sound effects being for those specific tracks is unsourced, plus don't think the latter of the three should be surrounded by speech marks
    • I've cited the liner notes that do bring up these credits. The Ian Peel source just indicates what notable contributors were on the album, but weren't too specific what those contributions were. HumanxAnthro (talk) 22:44, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concept and sound[edit]

  • Add the release year of the albums; do not do all in brackets though, as that would be too cluttered
    • I've removed the album names since it's common knowledge those sampler instruments are used in many of Horn's other works besides those three albums.

Release and promotion[edit]

Albums and singles[edit]

Commercial reception[edit]

  • Make this its own section titled commercial performance, moving to being the one directly before track listing
  • "single there," and, in his home country," → "single there" and, in his home country of the United Kingdom,"
  • "it was unable to" → "It was unable to" per the new sentence, but where do any of the sources mention this? If none do, then remove it because an album not charting only has notability if specifically written about.
    • The album not being a success in the UK is discussed (albeit a little bit) in The Face citation plus the Ian Peel source. I presume the album not charting would be an example of this and made notable by those two citations. You also know details don't have to be "notable" per se, it's the main topic of the article that has to been notable to be written about. HumanxAnthro (talk) 20:44, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and singles of the title track and" → "while the title track and"
  • "the album fared better in" → "Adventures in Modern Recording fared better in"
  • The France and Netherlands parts for the album's performance are not sourced, plus remove comma after the Netherlands and place any ref solely at the end of the sentence before [26]
    • You might've missed it during spotchecking, but the album being a success in France is from the Ian Peel source, although it may not have come up in your word searching if you put in "France" since Trevor Horn used "French people" to label the country: "For the UK at least, he was right and the singles met a muted reaction. But in Europe it was a different story. “Certainly French people loved the album,”" Also added citation for Netherlands performance. HumanxAnthro (talk) 20:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews[edit]

  • HumanxAnthro This is referring to when you have the punctuation inside the speech marks when not quoting full sentences, such as "Yes-style pomposity." for starters. Also, you have accidentally placed punctuation inside the title "Beatnik" at other points in this article, just to note. --K. Peake 08:14, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Track listing[edit]

  • Good

Personnel[edit]

Charts and certifications[edit]

Album[edit]

Singles[edit]

References[edit]

Final comments and verdict[edit]

  • HumanxAnthro  Pass now, there was only one issue with the wording in the lead but I copyedited that in for you. Congratulations on another GA, but I extend my praise to how thorough you were in your response to my comments! --K. Peake 12:09, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]