This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Punk music, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Punk musicWikipedia:WikiProject Punk musicTemplate:WikiProject Punk musicPunk music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles
Okay, I can see that the Telegraph called it "fizzing indie rock". Fair enough. Vice said the song was "like a semi-jokey revival of early 00s indie rock." Which kind of supports the Telegraph except for the "jokey" part.
NME is not saying it's a song in the lo-fi genre. NME is only saying it's more lo-fi than the band's usual stuff, which is not strong enough to define the song.
Song genres are defined by multiple sources agreeing, not by one source saying one thing and another source saying another thing. You can talk about various genres in the article body but when you say explicitly "this is the song's genre" it better be supported by multiple sources in agreement. Binksternet (talk) 18:23, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Is lo-fi a genre? According to its Wikipedia page, it's a production quality. You are correct in saying that NME does not say it's a song in the lo-fi genre, which is why it is not in the infobox as part of the genres. I wouldn't include "futuristic", "hazy", or any other production quality in there (as examples), since they are not genres. I think re-wording to avoid confusion might solve this issue. In terms of outletmag.co, I saw it when writing this article and chose not to include it out of WP:RSP. The "FAQ page" is blank, the "Our Team" page is also blank, and while I couldn't find an "About Us" section, the website's description on Google reads: "Outlet is a space where creative minds can come together and publish unique content on a daily basis for the enjoyment of our readers." Thus, I have no way of verifying that it has any sort of editorial oversight. Giacobbetalk18:36, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I just thought it might be confusing because the readers could think [15] was the only source used for the sentence, but I guess it's ok. --K. Peake12:19, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"staticy drums,[33] a skittering" → "staticy drums and a skittering" because the influences can go in their own sentence to avoid a run-on; move [33] to the end of the production sentence and place [34] directly after it Done
Img looks good!
"and the acknowledgement of" → "and acknowledgement of" Done
Full-stop is not needed after the question mark because that is a full quote Done
Remove pipe on STDs Done
The "new, maturing personality" part is not sourced Done
"a cross between" → "a cross between the" Done
"Thomas Smith of" → "Thomas Smith from" to avoid overusing "of" Done
"Morgan Enos of" → "Morgan Enos from" per above Done
"represents "the point" → "focuses on "the point" Done
"to the Strokes' Room on Fire, "rendered" → "to Room on Fire "rendered" Done
(CA)Giacobbe✓Pass now, a few issues popped up after my comments that I fixed and great job in responding within hours; I crossed out the ones you forgot to mark off. --K. Peake13:32, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]