Jump to content

Talk:I Should Coco/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


Two bits from somebody not often at GA

[edit]

I'm not putting an "on hold" tag or "underview" on this or anything like, because this is not my usual hangout, but I'm going to offer some requested feedback. :) Overall, I think the article is certainly looking quite impressive. It seems very informative to me, and it has a good flow. There are a few things that I notice that may need to be addressed which may or may not be considerations in a typical GA review. The one that probably would be relates to verifiability.

  • Style concerns
    • There are wikilinks within quotations, which does not conform to general practice as set out at WP:MOSQUOTE. One example: "There's a few people who are just really out there. There's a lot of people around Oxford who are real spliffheads and that, who go and lie down in Port Meadow, but I'm not really sure about them. I'm not really sure that they're individuals: they're part of a much larger thing."[1] Perhaps there would be good reason to wikilink unusual terms, such as spliffheads, but I don't see that Port Meadow requires exception to that guideline. This is something to consider in other quotations as well.
    • Wikipedia:Quotations is an essay, not a guideline, but it seems to me that it might improve readability to follow it with regards to the blockquote following the above and to introduce the text rather than leaving it to stand alone, with some introductory text like "In a 2004 interview, Coombes said:" I'm also not sure why Supergrass is included after the attribution, much less why it's in italics. The work that appears in seems to have been "Still On The Buzz!", Play Music, looking at refs.
    • Small formatting issue: "To date, 'I Should Coco' is the only Supergrass album"--need italics. :)
All Done TwentiethApril1986 (want to talk?) 19:36, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Verifiability concerns
    • I believe references could be clarified in some places. For instance, I can't tell who said they "addressed the subject with more insight than most" or who holds up a song "as a musical example of teenage rebellion." What is the source for "Though it is one of their most popular songs, the band rarely play "Alright" in their live sets anymore, not because they dislike it, but because it would be wrong for a band whose members are now all in their 30s to sing a song of such youthful exuberance"? The next referenced source, here, does support the band's quote about the song, but I don't see anything in there about youthful exuberance or liking/disliking the material, and evidently the band was in its 20s at the time of the interview. What's the source for the Coombs quote about the song? If it's the Q Magazine article, that may bear repeating, since it isn't clear.
    • With respect to this sentence: "All five singles released from I Should Coco were well received by the British public", it seems it may need to be clarified that you mean all of the singles released in the UK. Either that, or you need to include something to show that the US-only promo release was also well received by the British public.
    • You seem to be sourcing video rotation to MTV, but in fact the text there is an AMG mirror. Perhaps you should source it directly to AMG. Also, that source doesn't seem to support the following: "To date, 'I Should Coco' is the only Supergrass album that has made any impact on the United States:". Do you have a source to indicate specifically that no other release has made any impact in the US? (I'm not sure how one would prove that, unless a recent reliable source says as much. "Any impact" seems a bit nebulous. :))
I'm not even sure the album made any impact in the US. That statement was left there from an old editor. Shall remove it. TwentiethApril1986 (want to talk?) 19:36, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, these are my observations. I hope they are helpful to you, and if I can clarify my perceptions, please let me know. Good luck with the GA review. The album certainly reflects a lot of nurturing in the past six months or so and is much improved from this time last year! --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review comments

[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article looks pretty good. It just needs a few MOS, referencing, and image issues sorted out. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:52, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:


Prose/MOS

  • Expand the lead; summarize the sections about recording, reception, release in a sentence or two.
  • Only the initial word of a heading should be capitalized; i.e. Recording and Production-->Recording and production.
Done TwentiethApril1986 (want to talk?) 17:49, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the infobox: "February 1994 - August 1994"-->February 1994 – August 1994.
Done TwentiethApril1986 (want to talk?) 17:49, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "During the summer of 1993" Be more specific (month), differennt parts of the world have summer at different times.
Done TwentiethApril1986 (want to talk?) 19:50, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In a 2005 interview with The Times Gaz" Comma after "Times".
Done TwentiethApril1986 (want to talk?) 17:49, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done TwentiethApril1986 (want to talk?) 17:49, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Trim the External links section; Youtube videos for individual songs should be put on the songs' articles.
Done TwentiethApril1986 (want to talk?) 17:49, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References/Citations

This has been removed from the article now. Not reliable. TwentiethApril1986 (want to talk?) 19:16, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The only reason I think this is reliable is because the official Supergrass website has link the discography on The Strange Ones site. TwentiethApril1986 (want to talk?) 19:16, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remember for FAC that every web source must have at least a title, URL, publisher, and last access date.
  • Here are a couple things that need inline citations:
    • "and still remains the only number one album Supergrass has ever achieved."
    • "The group's primary musical influences came from bands such as Buzzcocks, T.Rex, The Jam, and The Kinks. Blur and Oasis were also inspirations to many Britpop bands of the 1990s."
Done TwentiethApril1986 (want to talk?) 18:58, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Done TwentiethApril1986 (want to talk?) 18:58, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fix these things and the issues from the commenter before me, and I'll pass this article right away. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:50, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pass Great job, this article is worthy of GA status. Some things to work on before submitting to FAC:
  • The prose looks good, but as always, get someone to look over it.
  • Expand the lead further.
  • Perhaps look for replacements for the questionable sources I listed above.
  • Format all references.
  • Add information about themes and the lyrics perhaps. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:23, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Robinson, John (1995-02-18). "Little Cred Roosters". NME. {{cite news}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:I_Should_Coco/GA1&oldid=246620503"