Talk:Death Don't Have No Mercy/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 06:36, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

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

This article looks quite good, but I will start reviewing shortly on today! --K. Peake 06:36, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Infobox and lead

• Target Holy blues to Gospel blues
• Replace hlist with bullet points per Template:Infobox song
• You should mention in the opening sentence that it is "from his studio album Harlem Street Singer (1960)" because the album's exact release month is not notable for the lead
  • I believe it is notable, as it is the first release of the song. Following WP:SONG#Article content, which says to "Write the basics first (this is often the information contained in the infobox)", the first instance of release would be essential. isento (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• The song did not receive a standalone release though; this is notable in the manner that you can mention the album in the opening sentence and add the release year in brackets. --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Okay, I've cut out the month, but preserved the release context (label and career rebirth note), as its connection extends to the last sentence. isento (talk) 03:37, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

• "It was first recorded" → "The song was first recorded"
  • IMO, "song" would follow too closely to the earlier sentence. There is no ambiguity as to the subject of the sentence. The subject-clause structure is preserved from the first sentence to the next, so it should be clear to the reader. isento (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• When coming after a sentence that also mentions the album, it is advisible to use the suggested wording. --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Correct me if I'm wrong, but the sentence does not begin after any mention of the album. The album is mentioned later in the second sentence. isento (talk) 03:37, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

• Yeah, this is fine; I was writing the initial suggestion with the album title being moved to the opening sentence in mind. --K. Peake 06:56, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

• "1960, for his album Harlem Street Singer," → "1960 for the album," since this was during the album sessions, plus remove the release month per earlier while keeping the during part, though
• "The recording was engineered" → "The song was engineered" with the target
  • Well, recordings or instances of recording are engineered, rather than songs, compositions, etc. There is a nuance of word choice here that is critical. isento (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Yeah, this makes sense actually. --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• The "lively" part does not appear to be mentioned in the body, unless I wasn't reading through correctly?
  • The third paragraph of the first section establishes his style of guitar had a "unique bounce" to it, bounce being another word for an exuberant or lively quality. And the composition section establishes his style of guitar features on the song. "Dazzling" in a later section bolsters this phrasing as well. isento (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• Target holy blues to Gospel blues
• Target relative minor to Relative key
• Remove wikilink on death
• Target Northport, Long Island to Northport, New York
  • Changes, and addressed remaining points above. isento (talk) 15:53, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Background

• Reword img text to something relevant
  • I think the relevance is self-explanatory, as the section is largely an introduction to the performer, his life, career, events leading up to the song, etc. isento (talk) 16:04, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• I do understand that it is from the same time period, but there is nothing in this section about the actual year 1963 so you could replace it with a different one or merely reword the text. --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Okay, I've changed it to say it is Davis in his 60s, since that aspect is mentioned in the text. isento (talk) 03:38, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

• "left during Davis' childhood" → "left during Gary Davis' childhood" per MOS:SAMESURNAME
  • That guideline says to use their full name on first mention and, for brevity, later mentions can be just the given name. So I'll make it "Gary's". isento (talk) 16:04, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Yeah that is acceptable; I was a bit unsure myself about how to stick to it, to be honest. --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• "Evelina soon gave" → "Evelina Davis soon gave"
• "that profoundly impacted him" → "that profoundly impacted Gary" to avoid overusing "him"
• "for Davis after he turned seven and had" → "for Gary Davis after he turned seven, by which time he had"
  • That would distance the fact of his mother's buying him the guitar from his demonstrating those qualities. "After" has the connotation of "because of", a connection that is supported by the source. Both are grammatically correct, but the current revision is more apt. isento (talk) 16:04, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• Are you sure blues and ragtime is the same guitar or it isn't two separate ones... I can't view the book source?
  • "Davis was originally a blues guitarist" (p. 77), "Davis, an excellent ragtime guitarist ..." (p. 71). isento (talk) 16:04, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• Target minister to Minister (Christianity)
• "he lived with his wife Annie" → "Gary Davis lived with his wife Annie"
• Target welfare checks to Welfare
• Target gratuities to Gratuity
• If you can source the lively bit, then it should be mentioned with his traditional blues playing here or the style in the comp section
  • Changes, and addressed the remaining points above. isento (talk) 16:04, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Recording

• Img looks good!
• Target sound engineer to Audio engineer
• Wikilink jazz
• Wikilink record labels
• "for his prospective LP album Harlem Street Singer," → "for Harlem Street Singer," but shouldn't you directly mentioned it being engineered at the studio?
  • The source says the album was forthcoming, so it should be introduced as such, as it doesn't exist yet. I have noted Goldstein and Van Gelder's direct roles. isento (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Neat addition! --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• "as was his penchant for" → "following his penchant of"
• Does in his words really need to be in brackets, or isn't that already implied by the fact the quote is in speech marks?
  • Yes. MOS:QUOTE says quote attribution should be at least recongizable by the footnote, but in this case it could be misconstrued as the words of Ian Zack. It is safer to note it is Davis. isento (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• Img looks good!
• Target tension to Tension (music)
  • The tension here is non-musical, but rather between two people. isento (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• Keep the ellipses as they are if part of the quotes; otherwise surround them by []
  • Yes, they are part of the quotes, as per the source. isento (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• Target splice to Reel-to-reel audio tape recording
• "entirely reliable as the bluesman" → "entirely reliable, as the bluesman"
• Should twenty-cent be twenty-cents per WP:CURRENCY or does that not apply because the currency is not Euros?
  • I see both usages in book sources, while Twenty-cent piece (United States coin) (a featured article) has "twenty-cent" in adjective form. So I will keep it as such. isento (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• That does make sense, especially since this article is in American English like that one. --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Specify which year the next one was
  • The source does not say. But the assumption is the year following the contract or recording session. I would leave it, stick to the source. isento (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• • It just reads awkwardly saying "the next year" when the previous one is not known; could you specify either point? --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Okay, I've changed it to "through 1961". isento (talk) 03:51, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

• • • Changes, and addressed the remaining points above. isento (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Composition

• Retitle to Composition and lyrics
  • I think that goes without saying for a popular music song, which the reader is made aware of in the lead and in the preceding sections, as opposed to a classical composition which generally won't have lyrics. Copyright registrations include lyrics as part of the composition. In short, I would keep it as it is for brevity. isento (talk) 17:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Not necessarily, as music like ambient is still released to this very year and you need to add lyrics for specifying that the section discusses them too. --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Fair enough. Done. isento (talk) 03:53, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

• Img looks good!
• Shouldn't you identify G-flat major by its full name?
  • I have seen it more commonly referred to just as "key of G-flat". But that could be an informality. So for here, I will change it. isento (talk) 17:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• "a guitar break wherein" → "a guitar break, wherein"
• Target fretboard to Fingerboard
• Shouldn't you write twelve-bar instead of 12-bar since that's how the form of blues is usually identified?
  • Ok. isento (talk) 17:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• "The lyrics are a" → "The lyrics of the song are a" because this is a new para
• Remove wikilink on death, but shouldn't you have the target to Death (personification) somewhere in prose like you've done for the img text?
  • I've added a quote about the "personification" aspect and linked it. isento (talk) 17:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• "family be gone"." I can't see if this is quoting a full set of lines or not, but if it is then place the punctuation inside the quote
  • It is not. isento (talk) 17:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• "of the following:" → "of the lyrics:" or use "lines" if these aren't from songs
• Per my earlier comment, should the punctuation be inside the following quote or not?
  • No. Song lyric, no stop or punctuation in them. isento (talk) 17:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• Remove target on tension per it being mentioned earlier
  • In this context, it is referring to the musical quality of tension. isento (talk) 17:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• Target chromatic to Diatonic and chromatic
  • Changes, and addressed the remaining points above. isento (talk) 17:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Release and reception

• Are you sure the img is accurate by saying that he played a part in a re-issue?
  • Yes. I think it is a fair description, given he headed the label that reissued the song on Let Us Get Together (1974). isento (talk) 17:27, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• First para looks good!
• If the publishing of the composition in the book was a re-issue as well, then reword accordingly
  • The source does not specify, but it gives the impression it was at least the first publication giving Davis copyright protection. So it is a publication, and quite possibly the first, since the LP does not appear to have a publishing credit. isento (talk) 17:27, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• Remove wikilink on copyright protection
• Reads confusingly having the labels in brackets; maybe add "through Fantasy and Kicking Mule, respectively" at the end of the sentence instead while still keeping the release years where they are
• "while calling the lyric" → "while calling the line"
• Target relative minor to Relative key
• Keep the ellipsis as current if part of the quote; otherwise surround by []
  • Copy-edited per the above points. isento (talk) 17:27, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Performances

• "featured in the" → "was featured in the"
  • That would place it in the passive voice, which is often discouraged in writing. I've been warned of this early on in my FA experiences. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• "live album" as it" → "live album", as it"
• "turbulent event for" → "unstable event for" because the former wording is not encyclopaedic
  • I don't see how it is not encyclopedic. In fact, it is more accurate than "unstable", which is defined as being prone to change. The rally was turbulent, marked by conflict, disorder, etc, as supported in the source. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• The word just stuck out to me as having a tone not suited for this site, but it's the most specific in this context and that was more of an initial reaction so keep as is here. --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Cover versions

• Target rock to Rock music on the quote box
• Target Club 47 to Club Passim
• Should it be "recalled" or "recalls" for correct tense, as I can't access the source to see if it's an interview?
  • The author is quoting a past interview rather than interviewing the subject himself. So I just used the past tense. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• Add "He further said," or "He further says," before the second quote to start the sentence properly
  • Actually, a continuation of the quotation can be introduced this way, as reflected in writing guides like this one. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• Remove the fanzine introduction to Little Sandy Review because this is not needed for a publication, plus either name the review or attribute the review to "a writer" like we did [[Talk:Live in Tokyo (Charles Tolliver album)/GA1|before]
  • There is no article for this title to offer readers context for what this publication is. Scholarly book sources like these support this phrasing. As for "a writer", this is unnecessary as it goes without saying it was a writer, rather than the entirety of a publication (its editors and staff, etc.) make the statement in unison, which is unheard of and unrealistic in published writing. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• It does read awkwardly saying "Little Sandy Review appraised" it, but you can keep the introduction even though "a writer" should still be added. --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Okay. Instead of "a writer", I've rearranged the wording to say the recording was "appraised in the ... 'Little Sandy Review as..." isento (talk) 04:32, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

• Img looks good!
• LP introduction is not needed to Harlem Street Singer since it is already known
• "The band debuted" → "The Grateful Dead debuted"
• "version" (in Zack's words)." → "version", as described by Zack." because the brackets don't really seem required here
• Target blues-rock to Blues rock
• "which resembled the Davis original," → "which resembled the original," because it is already known as Davis', plus you mentioned him last sentence
• "on hearing the record," → "on hearing the album," because it is awkward to use this term only once and this isn't an album article where you may be overusing the latter
  • Copy-edited. isento (talk) 18:29, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Davis' final rendition

• Img looks good!
• "proved one of" → "proved to be one of"
• "from a couple of teenage blues fans," → "from teenage blues fans" because otherwise it sounds like they were in a relationship, plus the comma is not needed here
• "of $200 and visited Menuez and Fahey on April 24" → "of $200, visiting Menuez and Fahey on April 24, 1972"
  • That would make the independent clause very short and surrounded by much longer dependent clauses. I don't see an issue of grammar here. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• The usages of "and" are too close together, especially after you have used a comma before the word earlier in this sentence. --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• I don't think intense is really appropriate language here; either add in speech marks if it's a quote or reword to something more neutral
  • It is not an issue of neutrality. A performance can be objectively intense or forceful, and the source supports that in its wording. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• This makes sense, actually. --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Is "recalled" or "recalls" the correct tense per my earlier comment?
  • For consistency's sake, subjects interviewed with ties to the events, as opposed to critical commentaries, I would leave it the way it is. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• "of the performance," → "of the performance that"
• "Zack says, "maybe" → "Zack says that "maybe"
• "chance to perform."" → "chance to perform"." per MOS:QUOTE
  • The full sentence is being quoted, and it is not a sentence fragment. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• It does not appear to be a quote of the sentence in its entirety, or did the writer just not start maybe with capitalisation for some reason? --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Yes, he started it that way. Full quote here. isento (talk) 04:32, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

• • • Copy-edited. isento (talk) 18:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

See also

• Are you sure African-American music is relevant enough to be here?
  • Yes. Especially given the background section, the article has a large context in this topic and serves as an intersection for a number of references in the article on African-American music, including the historical conditions that gave rise to spirituals, the blues, ragtime. isento (talk) 18:18, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Notes

• According to Davis, → According to Gary Davis, (per MOS:SAMESURNAME)
• Target folk remedy to Traditional medicine
• Davis was assessed to → he was assessed to
• Keep the ellipses as they are if part of the quotes; otherwise surround them by []
  • Done. Copy-edited. isento (talk) 18:21, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

References

• Copyvio score looks amazing at 9.1%!!!
• Does ref 21 need to include page 126 next to the other source, or can't you just remove it from there and invoke [25] next to the source in the body?
  • I've separated it. isento (talk) 18:25, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
• Same issues goes for ref 30 including page 237 despite [29] already citing the source
  • This should remain as is. Different parts of that one sentence are verified individually by each of those sources. isento (talk) 18:25, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Bibliography

• Target Oak Publications to Wise Music Group
• Shouldn't you add an archive URL for the AllMusic ref, being as that's the only actual URL cited?
  • Done. isento (talk) 18:27, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

External links

• Good

Final comments and verdict

•  On hold until all of the issues are fixed; interesting change to review a song article by you for once! --K. Peake 13:42, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Thank you! I've responded and edited accordingly. isento (talk) 18:28, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Isento Thank you back for this quick response; I have left comments in any areas of importance above! --K. Peake 21:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• My pleasure. I have done so again. isento (talk) 04:33, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

• Isento Great to wake up to your second response here in the UK; I only left one comment above in a relevant area. ✓ Pass now though, as you have no more issues left to fix! --K. Peake 06:56, 13 March 2021 (UTC)