Talk:Hardcore punk/GA3

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Vaticidalprophet (talk · contribs) 15:10, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Picking this up. Am aware of the two prior quickfails, but they're a while ago now. This is a long article, and it may take some time to return with a review. Vaticidalprophet 15:10, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Hey, Hoponpop69, I'm actually going to be taking over this review from Vaticidalprophet. Fear not, I'm a certified Hardcore Kid and I should get to this review by the end of the week, grad school nonsense willing. — GhostRiver 14:37, 14 July 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

History

2020s

• None of the references in this section are formatted properly
• I think "difficult" is an understatement -- maybe specify the closing of venues and other restrictions that prevent physical shows from occurring
• Band and record label presence on Instagram, along with hardcore podcasts like Axe To Grind, zines, and video content from videographers like hardcore archivist Sunny Singh of Hate5Six have helped the hardcore community stay connected during an unprecedented era of social distancing. This reads a bit promotional at the moment. Maybe try something like "With social distancing limiting the availability of physical interactions, the hardcore community has relied on social media activity, podcasting, zines, and video content to stay connected virtually."
• Why did these hardcore groups gain mainstream attention during the pandemic era?

General comments

• Very few of the references are formatted properly. Please use the cite tags provided in the editing space rather than applying your own style.

Ok, I'm going to level with you. This article, as it stands, is written like a research paper moreso than an encyclopedia. The reason that most of the sections aren't filled out is because I noticed a lot of broad, overarching problems that I'd just repeat every time:

• References: very few, if any, are properly formatted, with some bare links.
• Reliable sources: WP:ALLMUSIC prefers that, whenever possible, you use a non-AllMusic source. Beyond that, there are several blog posts and other non-reliable sources like IMDb.
• Prose, broadness, and focus: This is the biggest problem I see. Very few sections are developed beyond a list of bands. It's more useful to have a history of how a scene developed in a particular time and place than to list out all of the examples. I think the strongest showing of this is in the "other American regions" subhead: okay, we have a list of Minneapolis bands, but what makes Minneapolis hardcore special/different? How did it develop? There's also an overreliance on direct quotes that, again, I feel would be better served in a research paper than in the context of a Wikipedia article.

Regrettably, I'm going to have to fail this article, as the issues are overarching enough that they go beyond what a GA reviewer is asked to fix. I would recommend looking at some music GAs and FAs to get a better sense of what this prose looks like. — GhostRiver 22:24, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Agree. And the whole entry is skewed to being 90% about the US as though it was the only originator and home of hardcore. It does not acknowledge the massive influence of the crucial hardcore bands crass and discharge; it takes no interest in the European hardcore scene and only a nod to the Asian and South American scenes. And yes, it looks like a civilian wrote this. Mswestbrom (talk) 14:34, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

I suspect getting this article to GA status will be quite difficult. Every time I look at it, something new raises an eyebrow. (Today it was “Knoxville.) Morganfitzp (talk) 21:17, 13 December 2023 (UTC)