Wikipedia:Peer review/Discipline Global Mobile/archive1

Discipline Global Mobile

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…

Music fans and business-ethicists may enjoy reading about the music company of Robert Fripp (King Crimson).
I want to improve the article to attain Featured Article status.
The article was improved by the successful Good-Article nomination, with the improved article then receiving high praise (at my talk page).
The article is short, and a peer-review should not be taxing.

Thanks, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:02, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Is there a real necessity to abbreviate King Crimson? Do the band use that abbreviation?
" in compact discs" usually "on compact discs" or "in compact disc format".
Every sentence in the lead contains DGM. Perhaps you could shake it up a little with the odd "The company..." or similar?
"by Martin (1997)" this is very odd to me, who is Martin (1997)? I know it links to a ref, but that's an odd thing to say in prose.
(pictured, immediate right) - I've never seen this in articles before, I don't think it's necessary either.
I see no real good reason for the subsections 1.1, 3.1 and 4.1, the content of those sections could easily be merged into 1, 3 and 4.
I wouldn't include King Crimson in the links to the subsections, just the "in 1974" and "in 1981" would work better for me.
(pictured, top of page) same comment as before.
"which remain visible at the DGM site." what does that mean? Physically? On the website? Do you mean they're displayed prominently at the workplace?
"These aims include" colon would be good after "include".
"DGM's aims were called "exemplary" by Martin (1997), " same comment as before.
(pictured), not needed.
"logo's designer,[2][16] Steve Ball.[9][11][17][18]" does that sentence really need 6 cites?
"above the prevailing rate." surely there is no "prevailing rate" in the music industry? Isn't it all done on a case-by-case basis?
Peter Hamill has two m's.
Guitar Craft or Guitar-Craft?
"according to Atton (2004, p. 153).[14]" isn't that the point of [14] so you don't have to write "according to ..."?
"wrote Atton (2001, p. 43)." ditto.
"April–May 1980" I seem to recall that should be a spaced en-dash. Check WP:DASH.

The Rambling Man (talk) 15:47, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replies

Thanks again The Rambling Man, for your great effort and very good suggestions.

I reply to your concerns:

Is there a real necessity to abbreviate King Crimson? Do the band use that abbreviation?
I should see what Sid Smith, Eric Tamm, and our King Crimson article use. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:30, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
" in compact discs" usually "on compact discs" or "in compact disc format".
True! :)
Every sentence in the lead contains DGM. Perhaps you could shake it up a little with the odd "The company..." or similar?
Hmmm.... :)

Addressed topics

"by Martin (1997)" this is very odd to me, who is Martin (1997)? I know it links to a ref, but that's an odd thing to say in prose.
DONE! I cite sources in text when their statements are especially strong, and may be questioned by a reader. Footnotes suffice, I think.
(pictured, immediate right) - I've never seen this in articles before, I don't think it's necessary either.
REMOVED!
I see no real good reason for the subsections 1.1, 3.1 and 4.1, the content of those sections could easily be merged into 1, 3 and 4.
DONE
I wouldn't include King Crimson in the links to the subsections, just the "in 1974" and "in 1981" would work better for me.
DONE, also rewriting terrible prose.
(pictured, top of page) same comment as before.
"which remain visible at the DGM site." what does that mean? Physically? On the website? Do you mean they're displayed prominently at the workplace?
REMOVED as OR and inessential. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:18, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"These aims include" colon would be good after "include".
REWROTE
"DGM's aims were called "exemplary" by Martin (1997), " same comment as before.
DONE! (Same reply. Also Martin's book is Marxist, so his "exemplary" deserved an in-text attribution.)
(pictured), not needed.
REMOVED!
"logo's designer,[2][16] Steve Ball.[9][11][17][18]" does that sentence really need 6 cites?
DONE! I joined citations where possible. For this fact, The KC/DGM material, Ball, and Fripp should be reliable sources for the proposition that Ball owns the design. Hegarty and the other H's book credits him with the design. Some sources are used elsewhere, so could not be combined.

"above the prevailing rate." surely there is no "prevailing rate" in the music industry? Isn't it all done on a case-by-case basis?
The prevailing rate depends upon one's position in music, I suppose. I shall try to clarify this.

resolved concerns

Peter Hamill has two m's.
FIXED!
Guitar Craft or Guitar-Craft?
I should have considered hyphenation when GC is used as an adjective, in which case concatenating three nouns seems Teutonic. I tend to be a hyphenation maximalist, and again I usually capitulate to my readers' wishes, when answering to editors.
"according to Atton (2004, p. 153).[14]" isn't that the point of [14] so you don't have to write "according to ..."?
"wrote Atton (2001, p. 43)." ditto.
DONE
"April–May 1980" I seem to recall that should be a spaced en-dash. Check WP:DASH.
DONE! I checked and happily learned that my usage of the en-dash was recommended. WP:DASH gives these examples of correct en-dash usage: "1–17 September" and "February–October 2009".

I shall write more later. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:30, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]