Wikipedia:Peer review/Iowa (album)/archive1
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for May 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I feel that the article has the potential to be a GA with the help of a peer review.
Thanks, REZTER TALK ø 13:27, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
- Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
- Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.Thanks, « Milk's Favorite Cookie ( talk / contribs) 22:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Ruhrfsich comments: I agree with Milk's Favorite Cookie's comments and here are some more suggestions for improving the article:
- A model article is often useful for ideas for style, structure, refs, etc. I note that there are many album FA articles at Wikipedia:Featured_articles#Music, including God Hates Us All, which may be suitable models. Since you are interested in GA first, see the Music section (under Art) at Wikipedia:Good_articles for some GA models.
- Per WP:MOS#Quotations, quotes come before punctuation in most cases - so Hailed as the "absolute triumph of nu-metal,"[1] the album... should be Hailed as the "absolute triumph of nu-metal",[1] the album ...
- Last two sentences in "Album information" are uncited and need refs - see WP:CITE and WP:V
- For references that are available online (such as the Rolling Stone album review, ref 17) I would link the review in the reference. {{cite web}} is useful here.
- Watch out for peacock words Iowa, unlike its predecessor, saw producer Ross Robinson capturing the band's technicality as opposed to the raw energy that Slipknot is known for.[10] If someone saws they are known for raw energy, it is probably better to quote them. See WP:PEACOCK
- Last sentence in "Music style and lyrical themes" section seems more like it belongs in critical reception section.
- The album articles I looked at all put "listy" stuff at the end, so I would put critical reception before Track listing
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)