Talk:Zapp

Untitled

vocoders are not the same thing as talkboxes.

I concur. From the video's i've just watched, it would seem that Roger Troutman uses keyboards plugged into talkboxes, not vocoders.

Looks like something just copied parts of this article from allmusic.com Wathiik 17:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd say this article definitely needs some clean-up. It's pretty hard to follow, and much of it seems to just be a listing of their songs and albums.

• Marked as such. :) Ianthegecko 15:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

THE GOD OF TALKBOX:ROGER LYNCH TROUTMAN —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.107.111.100 (talk) 19:54, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 17:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Nominator: Kaleidoscopic God (talk)

Hi! My review for this article will be here shortly. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 17:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

1: Well-written

• a. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
• b. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

WP:LEAD:

Check for WP:LEAD: Check for Correct Structure of Lead Section:  Done Check for Citations (WP:LEADCITE):  Done Check for Introductory text:  Done Check for Provide an accessible overview (MOS:INTRO):  Done Check for Relative emphasis:  Done Check for Opening paragraph (MOS:BEGIN):  Done Check for First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE):  Done Check for Format of the first sentence (MOS:BOLDTITLE):  Done Check for Proper names and titles:  Done Check for Abbreviations and synonyms (MOS:BOLDSYN): None Check for Foreign language (MOS:FORLANG): None Check for Pronunciation: None Check for Contextual links (MOS:CONTEXTLINK):  Done Check for Biographies: NA Check for Organisms: NA Check for Biographies of living persons: NA Check for Alternative names (MOS:LEADALT):  Done Check for Non-English titles: Check for Usage in first sentence: Check for Separate section usage: Check for Length (WP:LEADLENGTH):  Done Check for Clutter (WP:LEADCLUTTER): None

WP:LAYOUT:

Done Check for WP:LAYOUT:  Done Check for Body sections: WP:BODY, MOS:BODY.  Done Check for Headings and sections:  Done Check for Section templates and summary style:  Done Check for Paragraphs (MOS:PARAGRAPHS):  Done Check for Standard appendices and footers (MOS:APPENDIX):  Done Check for Order of sections (WP:ORDER):  Done Check for Works or publications:  Done Check for See also section (MOS:SEEALSO):  Done Check for Notes and references (WP:FNNR):  Done Check for Further reading (WP:FURTHER):  Done Check for External links (WP:LAYOUTEL):  Done Check for Links to sister projects:  Done Check for Navigation templates:  Done Check for Formatting:  Done Check for Images (WP:LAYIM):  Done Check for Links:  Done Check for Horizontal rule (WP:LINE):  Done

WP:WTW:

Done Check for WP:WTW:  Done Check for Words that may introduce bias:  Done Check for Puffery (WP:PEA):  Done Check for Contentious labels (WP:LABEL):  Done Check for Unsupported attributions (WP:WEASEL):  Done Check for Expressions of doubt (WP:ALLEGED):  Done Check for Editorializing (MOS:OPED):  Done Check for Synonyms for said (WP:SAY):  Done Check for Expressions that lack precision:  Done Check for Euphemisms (WP:EUPHEMISM):  Done Check for Clichés and idioms (WP:IDIOM):  Done Check for Relative time references (WP:REALTIME):  Done Check for Neologisms (WP:PEA): None Check for Offensive material (WP:F***):  Done Check for WP:MOSFICT:  Done Check for Real-world perspective (WP:Real world):  Done Check for Primary and secondary information (WP:PASI):  Done Check for Contextual presentation (MOS:PLOT):  Done

WP:EMBED:
Done Prose is preferred over list (WP:PROSE): Check for Tables (MOS:TABLES):

2: Verifiable with no original research

• a. Has an appropriate reference section: Yes
• b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: excellent (Thorough check on Google. Cross-checked with the other FAs)

WP:RS:

Done Check for WP:RS:  Done Cross-checked with the other FAs: Nirvana (band), Rush (band), Tool (band), Fightin' Texas Aggie Band Check for the material (WP:RSVETTING): (not contentious)  Done Is it contentious?: No Does the ref indeed support the material?: Check for the author (WP:RSVETTING):  Done Who is the author?: Does the author have a Wikipedia article?: What are the author's academic credentials and professional experience?: What else has the author published?: Is the author, or this work, cited in other reliable sources? In academic works?: Check for the publication (WP:RSVETTING):  Done Check for Self-published sources (WP:SPS):

WP:MINREF:
Done Check for inline citations WP:MINREF:  Done Check for Direct quotations:  Done Check for Likely to be challenged:  Done Check for Contentious material about living persons (WP:BLP): NA

• c. No original research:  Done

WP:NOR:
Done Check for primary sources (WP:PRIMARY):  Done Check for synthesis (WP:SYN):  Done Check for original images (WP:OI):  Done

3: Broad in its coverage

a. Major aspects:

Done Cross-checked with the other FAs: Nirvana (band), Rush (band), Tool (band), Fightin' Texas Aggie Band Check for Article scope as defined by reliable sources: Check for The extent of the subject matter in these RS: Check for Out of scope: Check for The range of material that belongs in the article: Check for All material that is notable is covered: Check for All material that is referenced is covered: Check for All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered: Check for The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge: Check for Stay on topic and no wandering off-topic (WP:OFFTOPIC):

b. Focused:
Done Check for Readability issues (WP:LENGTH): Check for Article size (WP:TOO LONG!):

4: Neutral

WP:NPOV:

Done 4. Fair representation without bias:  Done Check for POV (WP:YESPOV):  Done Check for naming (WP:POVNAMING):  Done Check for structure (WP:STRUCTURE):  Done Check for Due and undue weight (WP:DUE):  Done Check for Balancing aspects (WP:BALASPS):  Done Check for Giving "equal validity" (WP:VALID):  Done Check for Balance (WP:YESPOV):  Done Check for Impartial tone (WP:IMPARTIAL):  Done Check for Describing aesthetic opinions (WP:SUBJECTIVE):  Done Check for Words to watch (WP:YESPOV):  Done Check for Attributing and specifying biased statements (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV):  Done Check for Fringe theories and pseudoscience (WP:PSCI): None Check for Religion (WP:RNPOV): None

5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes

6: Images  Done (NFC with a valid FUR)

Images:

Done 6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:  Done Check for copyright tags (WP:TAGS):  Done Check for copyright status:  Done Check for non-free content (WP:NFC):  Done Check for valid fair use rationales (WP:FUR):  Done 6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  Done Check for image relevance (WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE):  Done Check for Images for the lead (WP:LEADIMAGE):  Done Check for suitable captions (WP:CAPTION):  Done

Kaleidoscopic God, I'm glad to see your work here. I do have some insights based on the above checklist that I think will improve the article. Can you provide incline citations for the following?:

• in early 1981 without much impact.
• The Many Facets of Roger was eventually released in late 1981 on Warner Bros.
• but only in 1995, a decade after its initial release. Zapp's presence began to fade in the latter half of the 1980s, and Troutman's attention was focused on his solo career. The final release by Zapp before Troutman's death was Zapp V, on September 12, 1989, which met with moderate commercial success and failed to receive an RIAA certification.

Besides that, I think the article looks excellent. All the best, --Seabuckthorn ♥ 16:59, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Cited everything you wanted apart from the second one: "The Many Facets of Roger was eventually released in late 1981 on Warner Bros.". Is this too much of a hitch to pass the article? Kaleidoscopic God (talk) 21:19, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I went ahead and cited the second one also because all statistics must be cited to a RS. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 04:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Promoting the article to GA status. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 04:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Author name(s) and citation clean up

I noticed that my discog references were not good as they are user submitted info, changed that and replaced with some hopefully more reliable sources. A couple still remain and I'll be working on that, the one source can remain in my opinion regarding Roger Troutman's first recordings as it has photographic evidence of the band's name and track listing. Also, please stop changing the book's author from 'Rickey' to 'Ricky'. the author of the book is credited clearly as 'Rickey'. Thanks. Kaleidoscopic God (talk) 19:50, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

If you have images of the records, you can cite the album as a source opposed to citing discogs. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:52, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggesting the things I need to cite, will get on that. Kaleidoscopic God (talk) 20:32, 17 February 2014 (UTC)