Talk:Omen (Antestor album)

Satanist

Were they Satanist or just described by the band as Satanist? There's a big difference; for all we know, the band could be mistaken and they were just dealing with militant atheists. I ask because the three sources all come from the same reporter at the same Christian newspaper, and it seems like the "Satanist" part comes from a quote from the guitarist: "But we were the trapped like rats. Antestor playing extreme metal with a Christian message, while those who waited on us is called "Satanists" - they hang ten years after the development in Norway. It is so far nothing new that some extreme metal fans "hate" the Bible and Christianity. But it is the first time for us that there is such a thing." (Google translated) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 07:49, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Omen (Antestor album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Retrohead (talk · contribs) 21:46, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

I copyedited some sentences I found verbose. Feel free to revert anything you disagree with.--Retrohead (talk) 22:19, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Lead

• Can you describe what the cover depicts?
• Can you provide the cities (or venues) which the band encountered difficulties?

Background

• Can we lose the "Main article: Antestor" and link the band in the opening sentence?
• What do you consider a "significant" lineup change? One member remaining from the original lineup or something else?
• "the band claims that it never received royalties for that album". It is the band or the label?
• Since we have two sections with two sentences, it might give the reader a perception that those areas are not well researched. To avoid that, can you merge "Release and promotion" with "Touring" by moving the sentences fro "Release" to the very start of "Touring"? I suggest doing the same to "Cover artwork" and "Style and lyrics".

By the way, why not rename "Style and lyrics" to "Music and lyrics"?

Style and lyrics

• What does "strong" black metal means? That the album is rooted in black metal, perhaps?
• Can you consider excluding "unblack metal" from the infobox because the previous note suggests this is a black metal album?

Touring

• Ok, can we find something intruiging about the concerts except when and where they took place?

Critical reception

• Since we have the grades in the table, I don't find it necesarry to repeat them in the prose.
• Per MOS:ALBUMS, it is usually written "Personnel" instead of "Lineup". Also, credits about production, sound engineering, mastering, mixing, etc. should be provided.

Thanks, I'll work on these points! Regarding personnel, I now have a copy of the album and so can provide that info. I couldn't find the info online at the time.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 04:31, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

There's been no progress here in a week, so I'll be closing the nomination as failed. If you wish to re-nominate the article, you can contact me to avoid the waiting queue.--Retrohead (talk) 18:48, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I was lazy on this, I'll re-nominate shortly once I work on this.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:54, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Unreliable sources

19 of this articles references are to Facebook, this is NOT a reliable or suitable reference to use. Theroadislong (talk) 07:56, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

@3family6: This editor is a hoot-and-a-half.The Cross Bearer (talk) 07:58, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

@3family6 and Theroadislong: SELFSOURCE is the reason I removed the tag.The Cross Bearer (talk) 09:07, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: - Facebook is reliable in this case because it is merely the medium through which Antestor made statements about itself.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 03:35, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Omen (Antestor album)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Retrohead (talk · contribs) 02:55, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

@Retrohead: Sorry for my laziness, take your time on starting this again if you want, since the first time I was slow to respond.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:55, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, when you're done with the notes from the previous review, I'll have a second look.--Retrohead (talk) 07:35, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

I think I addressed them all - do you want me to copy-paste the notes to here and add my comments?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 05:21, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

No problem, I'll continue with the rest of my comments.--Retrohead (talk) 09:08, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

...continuing

• Can you consider dropping "unblack metal" from the infobox because the music description says the album is "primarily black metal in sound"?

-I picked "unblack" because that is synonym for "Christian black metal." I figured that it is simpler and more concise to list "Extreme metal, unblack metal" than "Extreme metal, black metal, Christian metal." I did work the stylistic section so that it explicitly mentions unblack metal. Is this sufficient rationale? Or would it be better to just list "Extreme metal, Christian metal?"--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:31, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, works for me. I raised this issue because unblack metal was not mentioned in the "Music and lyrics" section.--Retrohead (talk) 21:30, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Gotcha, that's why I added a bit explicitly mentioning the term.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:09, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

• Only mention the musician's full name in his introduction (check Jan Axel Blomberg in "Critical reception")

-Done. I think I got all of these now.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:31, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

• Can you make the second statement from "Music and lyrics" and the quote from "Critical reception" in line with the rest of the prose?

-Done. Another editor blocked those quotes. I always thought that four lines, not three, is when to do that, but I reserved judgement. Since you find it problematic, I'm happy to restore those quotes back to the original format.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:31, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

• Please formatt the link from the statement in the "Brazilian tour".

-Done, I think. I'm assuming you meant the block quote? I've used the cite web template to format the link the the best that I can see how to do while using the blockquote template. --3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:31, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Not exactly. I meant the link from "Antestor - Timeline Photo" to be placed as a reference.--Retrohead (talk) 21:30, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Ah, a bit tricky, but I figured out how do do that.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:09, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

• Is the article properly categorised? I assumed there are more than two categories on album articles.

Most of the categories that it would be listed under are used to categorize Category: Antestor albums. There isn't really anything else stand-alone that this album would go under other than 2012 albums.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:09, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

• Please write "Nordic Fest" with small letters where needed (reference 7).

Done.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:09, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

• Can you avoid describing the reviews as "positive" or "mixed"? For example, the Musick Magazine score (6.5/10) might seem positive to some readers, while some may consider it mixed.

I thought it was standard to try and summarize reviews in prose this way, but I see your point. Done. I left in points where the reviewers clearly praised or criticized a particular aspect of the music, but did away with such summaries of an entire review.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 02:09, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

@Retrohead: What's the status now?--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 20:46, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, you can blame me for laziness this time. Glad to promote the article to GA. Congratulations.--Retrohead (talk) 08:32, 22 July 2015 (UTC)