Talk:Babylon (Skindred album)/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Currently reviewing, comments to follow.  REZTER  TALK   &oslash;  07:41, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The lead section needs a lot of expansion it should have at least one substantial paragraph, if not two (see WP:LEAD). It should offer a brief overview of all the information to follow.
 * The lead doesn't mention anything about the music section.  REZTER  TALK   &oslash;  14:29, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * This isn't completely required but I suggest that you use this template: Template:album cover fur on your images. It just helps with your fair use.
 * There is no information on where and when they recorded the album in the History section. It would help if you expanded on that.
 * "An early version of the album, Babylon, was first released in 2002 by RCA Records" - why was this an early version and not just it's original release date?
 * "and reissued in 2003" why what were the changes?
 * "On August 14, 2004, the album was released internationally by Lava Records, in association with Bieler Bros. Records." - I think you should have mentioned that the band left their previous label and explain why, then explain why it was re-released through the new record label and what the differences where.
 * All information regarding touring and singles could/should be in their own section titled "Promotion". Specifically if the first paragraph of the History section is expanded.
 * This section should before the "Music" section and ideally, the "Music" section would be called "Musical style".
 * "A second edition of the single was released, containing a remix of the song" - when?
 * "By the early 2000s, crossing rap and rock's respective DNA strands was no longer a bold experiment. From Faith No More and Shootyz Groove to Korn and 311, hip-hop had been hailing hardcore and metal and funk, and everything else, on an open radio frequency for a decade or more. [...] Into this big blasé world comes Babylon, the venom-spitting, pit-baiting debut from Skindred. [...] Webbe and company eschew that band's fetish for freely shifting sounds, in favor of a more focused ragga-rap-metal attack. It's not merely a facsimile of last year's money-making metal model. No, what little repetition does exist here comes from the dancehall influence, the harping and chatting over a nonstop groove."
 * This quote is far too long. I suggest cutting it down and rewording. The first two sentences have no reference to the band themselves, try something like; Allmusic critic Johnny Loftus wrote that Babylon brought a new edge to the "blasé world" of rap-rock, saying that "the venom-spitting.....
 * I would suggest adding information about their lyrics in the Musical style section.
 * This would help expand that section which is quite short.
 * The first paragraph of the Reception section features only chart positions. I suggest creating a separate section for this. For more sources regarding chart performances see WP:GOODCHARTS.
 * Any reason why you haven't done this?
 * Can you expand the reception section with both more reviews (try looking on google or something) and the Eagle Eye review.
 * You messaged me saying you couldn't find more reviews and after a quick look on google i found review on; avrev.com and tunelab.com. You would have about 4 or 5 reviews to work with and that should produce quite a substantial section, and please avoid just using big block quotes. See WP:Quotes.
 * Added the additional reviews. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 18:33, 26 July 2009 (UTC))
 * Better, this is an OK section but it could still be expanded. This won't effect the GA review, just saying.  REZTER  TALK   &oslash;  14:19, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The addition of "This track listing reflects the United Kingdom release, as the version released in the United States does not contain the track "We Want"." in the track listing section looks quite untidy. Consider using this template: Template:Note.
 * Why is there no information regarding production personnel?
 * I suggest adding external links. I especially suggest creating a template to interlink all articles related to Skindred Template:Skindred, (example: Template:Metallica).
 * Why are the band members creditted as; Dan, Mikeydemus, Dirty Arya and not their full names?
 * Shouldn't Martyn "Ginge" Ford and Jeff Rose be in the personnel section because they left the band following the release of the album?
 * The personnel section is based upon the CD booklet. The musicians listed are credited as they appear in the booklet. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 18:20, 24 July 2009 (UTC))
 * Yeah and if they left following the release of the album surely they were credited on it.  REZTER  TALK   &oslash;  19:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * A small MOS thing, in the personnel section instead of having the musicians and additional personnel as sub-sections, use this:  ;Musicians . That way it doesn't clutter the contents box.  REZTER  TALK   &oslash;  14:26, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

This article needs a lot of work, but I will put it on hold for now.  REZTER  TALK   &oslash;  08:15, 22 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Just to give you a bit of notice, I will be closing this review in 7 days. So if you don't address my comments above and meet the GA criteria by August 2 then I'm afraid it may fail.  REZTER  TALK   &oslash;  15:33, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Result

 * GA review (see here for criteria)

I'm sorry but there are too many flaws in the article at the moment to pass it. Good luck improving it.  REZTER  TALK   &oslash;  09:22, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * As mentioned above there are several manual of style issues.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * There are large holes in the content including a list of chart performances and information about their lyrics.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Pass/Fail: