Talk:Me Against the World/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Hi! I'll be reviewing this article as time comes on. I'll be editing things which I feel I can edit without having to do any real extensive knowledge of the album. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
General comments:
Infobox:

I realize Allmusic states March 14, 1995 but this book states "February 27, 1995". Which is it?
"November 1994 – January 1995" needs a citation as it's not discussed in the article when it was recorded.
"Mobb Music" seems to re-direct to West Coast Rap which is already it's own article listed in the article. Perhaps this genre should be removed?
WP:Albums suggests to drop the term "Records" at the end of the Labels section in the infobox, so this should read as "Interscope/Atlantic" rather then "Interscope/Atlantic Records".
There should be more consistency in the infobox review section. The reviews should be alphabetized (I'll leave it up to you whether Christgau is under "R" for Robert or "C" for Christgau" and perhaps you should add dates to when the original review was written.
That The Source review should be removed as it linking to a non-reputable source.
Those singles in the infobox have very specific dates to when they were released but the citations at the bottom of the page aren't so specific on what day they were released. Can these be cited? Otherwise change it to only their specific month.

Intro paragraph:

well received by critics and fans: the critics line is alright although Rolling Stone, Christgau, and Entertainment Weekly didn't seem that crazy about it. Maybe it should be generally well received on it's initial release, then state later reviews, and album "best of listings" to state how it was seen in later years. Also, you can't really cite fan enthusiasm on wikipedia, even with album sales, as it's basically impossible to cite that everyone who bough the album, really enjoyed it.
"Amaru Entertainment, the label owned by 2Pac's mother Afeni Shakur, has since gained its rights." This needs citation and is not mentioned again in the article. Can we get a citation for this?
"soaring to the number one spot upon its release", "soaring" sounds a little biased when stating that it simply "debuted" or "charted" would be more appropriate.

Background:

"However, the young artist" try to avoid using terms like "However" when it could be said as "Shakur did not have much time to celebrate his accomplishments..."
"In the summer of 1993". Be careful with using terms like "summer" which means different times of the year for someone who would be reading this in Australia. If you can find an article marking a more specific date that would be great but failing that, change it to a more simple "In 1993".
"whom the artist" change this to Shakur as it could be confusing if you are suggesting that the Hughes brother or Shakur is what we are talking about.
"In light of the way Shakur felt his image was being portrayed by the general press and public". The citation doesn't really remark that was the reason that he chose the title other then it was going to be titled that. Can you find a citation where he explains the naming of the previous title?

Production:

Could you cite the date as well when that review was written from RapReviews.com? It might be good to note that this was not an initial critical reaction to the production, but one taken years after 2pac's death and album release.
Since Jon Parales doesn't even have a wiki article, you may want to note that he was a reviewer for the New York Times.
Adding the dates both the EW and New York Times reviews were written would be good too.

Lyricism:

"On the track "Can U Get Away," Shakur attempts to woo the woman who's managed to gain his affections away from an abusive relationship." needs citation explaining the song's theme.

Singles:

""So Many Tears" was the second single from the album, released four months after the first in June". That's a bit confusing and I don't fully understand what's going on. Can this be re-phrased?

Recpetion:

"Since it was released while he was in prison, Shakur became the first (and remains the only) artist to ever have a number one album while serving a prison sentence." I'd say change that to "...became the first and only artist..." but we also need a citation for this statement.
"legendary rock artist" sounds a pinch biased, perhaps re-phrase it to "popular rock artist" which is more appropriate.
the citation also notes that it went double platinum by December. That should be pointed out as well.
I realize the links to the rolling stone and Robert Christgau reviews are already linked at the top, but they should be cited at the bottom too. It might be a good idea to clairfy what reviews were the initial critical reception and which ones are reviews made much later on the album.
That The Source review does NOT have a good citation. Rateyourmusic has user submitted reviews and lists and it isn't a reputable source. Try to find a better cite for that.

Accolades:

Cduniverse.com wasn't noted as a reliable source for citing things. I got caught on this for my GA nom for Homogenic a while back. Might try to find a citation through googlebooks, like here

External links

There's no real need for another link to this review which is already linked in the album's review section at the top. So it should be removed.

That's all I can get through for now. Clean up some of these problems and I'll give it another look through within a week. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:39, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, as the nominator has computer problems and no progress is being made, I will fail this. Jezhotwells (talk) 03:20, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]