Talk:Badmotorfinger/GA2

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

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 10:06, 30 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I'll review this soon. At first glance, there seems to be some formatting error with the deluxe edition lists. FunkMonk (talk) 10:06, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The last paragraphs of tour and outtakes need citations. On the other hand, citations are not needed in the intro, which just summarises the article.
 * There is a good deal of duplinking throughout.


 * Fixed every issue that I could see, if you can elaborate on the duplinking that I can't see, that'd be great.  danny music editor  Speak up! 12:42, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * This script should highlight them. Good tool in general. FunkMonk (talk) 19:24, 30 May 2017 (UTC)


 * "as it had on its previous release Louder Than Love." Could give the year, and link.
 * "Cornell also added that the album is more representative of how the band is live." Why present tense?
 * ""New Damage" subtly criticizes the right-wing government of the United States." How does the source phrase this? Perhaps add "at the time".
 * I don't see any dire need to change this, this is almost exactly how it's phrased (it uses the word "attacked" rather than "criticized"). If you still think so, be bold.


 * Most other alobum articles use "Cover art" where you have "Packaging", any reason for this?
 * "I simply like it because it was colorful." Liked?
 * ❌ You cannot alter what's in the quote.  danny music editor  Speak up! 11:24, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Of course, I was thinking it may have been a typo here. FunkMonk (talk) 12:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)


 * "The 25th-anniversary reissue of Badmotorfinger was made available in two deluxe versions." Give year of release.
 * Personnel lists in other album GAs usually give a source for the info.
 * "featuring Motorvision" Explain what this is. I see it is explained in the later tour section, but it should be at first mention.
 * You start sentences with "afterward" a lot of times in the tour section, becomes a bit repetitive. Also, shouldn't it be afterwards?
 * "After touring in support of its previous album Louder Than Love (1989), Soundgarden began the recording sessions for their next album" Not stated specifically in the article body, only in the intro, which should not have unique info.
 * "Badmotorfinger was certified double platinum by the RIAA in April 1996, signifying two million shipped copies;[36] however, only 1.5 million copies had been sold by October 2010.[37]" This seems a bit strange. Any explanation?
 * Shipments are different than sales, and the United States' program only goes for shipped quantities apparently, not for actual record sales (though usually they're close to the same when certified; this is an outlier). I have no idea why it's been given the double. Sometimes they'll count a double album as two like Mellon Collie (it's diamond and has only shipped/sold around 5 million), but that doesn't appear to be what happened here.


 * "AllMusic considered the album's music to be "surprisingly cerebral and arty";" Only stated in intro.
 * It is worded differently in the article, the "cerebral and arty" part is all there.


 * "one of the last albums to do so." Only stated in intro.
 * Will remove.


 * No word on influence on later musicians or such?
 * I am not aware of any. It would seem some definitely are, but I don't know of any sources who name any specific bands or this particular record. My previous album GAs never mentioned that (that I can remember), thought they did state the particular record's influences.  danny music editor  Speak up! 21:00, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

, I think I have addressed everything up to this point. If you've got more, shoot. If not, are we good?  danny music editor  Speak up! 20:11, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I think it's fine now, and will pass. Nice to see this get improved, considering recent events... As you saw, there were some additions today about charts, if something is added again, it should of course just be formatted correctly, whoever did it before did not add the source to the paragraph added to the article body. Apart from this, it seems the fair use image has a redundant summary which could be removed. FunkMonk (talk) 20:23, 1 June 2017 (UTC)