Talk:Denmark Street/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) 23:47, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this over the next couple days. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:47, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a bit of a shuffle round of images, which should resolve these concerns. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Still a bit of white space at the end of that section, though not as bad as earlier. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:53, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the 20th century, Denmark Street had several Japanese businesses and was known as "Little Tokyo", but it became most famous as Britain's "Tin Pan Alley" housing numerous music publishers' offices. - Concurrently or subsequently?
  • to the Rookery - why the caps? The article refers to rookeries as a general noun. Do we have an article on this specific rookery?
The source actually calls it "the rookery of St Giles". So it's a specific instance of a rookery. Clarified. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per WP:LEADLENGTH, this article should have one or two paragraphs in the lead at maximum
  • CN tag added.
Fixed. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • As this is an article on a British subject, shouldn't the metres go first?
Yes, the source had it in feet. Fixed. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • A lot of the sections are very short and could probably be merged.
I've made a start on this but will come back to it later. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguation pages: Jacobite, Fender
I thought I'd fixed these, but it appears not. Anyway, now done. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Standardise whether or not you give life spans for people mentioned
I would say not. I think the only person affected by this is Augustus Siebe. Should now be fixed. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any more information on Little Tokyo?
The only source that documents this in any substance is Keiko Itoh's book. I can see an entry in the London Gazette that confirms Tokiwa really existed, so I can trust the book as being reliable. To be honest, I think merging the few sentences that are present into the above section is probably the best course of action - any further thoughts on this? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tokiwa restaurant and hotel - If this is the name of the restaurant (i.e. a proper name), it should not be in italics
Fixed. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • By the end of the decade, - which decade, 1950s or 1960s?
The specific quotation in the source is "In the 1950s and 60s the short street was a remarkable place ... [with people] walking along it and being accosted from upstairs windows and invited in to listen to the new songs and records". Changed to "By the 1950s". Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a few Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:41, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so sure. Without the clarification, a reader might not necessarily know who Jon Lord was (or mistake him for John Vernon Lord). Would a footnote fix this? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • In that case, why not a parenthetical or mdash? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:42, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1980s – present has a lot of really short sentences that should be expanded or merged; reads really roughly
I've redone this section. Some information was not very well sourced and trivial, so I've removed it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • More later
  • refurbish a basement rehearsal room for The Sex Pistols, which McLaren had bought from Badfinger. - The room or the band?
Reworded Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Number 1-3 or Numbers 1-3?
This Mojo source says "Numbers". Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • 800-seater - wouldn't 800-seat be just as clear and more English variant neutral?
I don't remember it reading "seater" last time I looked. Yes, should be "800-seat" per the source. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • several notable musicians. - feels weaselly. Why not just name names?
The source says "those of many musicians" - I've removed the phrase entirely as it's not really important. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link genres, perhaps?
Done Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:43, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • became a notable distributor of Rickenbacker guitars in the 1960s when the Beatles played them. - again with that weasel word, "notable"
Interesting comment. In this case, it's because many shops distribute and sell Rickenbacker guitars, which doesn't make any of them particularly special. But Rose Morris are a bit more than that, due to additional maintenance and development, and are the only British shop to be explicitly acknowledged on Rickenbacker's offical history ([1]). Can you think of an alternative phrase? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've found a much better source that explains the relationship between Rose Morris and Rickenbacker in clearer terms. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:41, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Camden 2012, p. 30. doesn't go to a reference.
Should be 2010 (per all the other citations to it) - fixed. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's mostly it for prose concerns. A couple questions which may be related to BrE/AmE (in or on a street? in or on an album?), but even then it's not much of an issue. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:41, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks for your comments so far. I think I've addressed everything except the lead, for which I'll ping @Dr. Blofeld: as he had a hand in writing it. The article currently has 15K of prose, which suggests a lead of two paragraphs, possibly three at a push. The first draft of a suitable lead is here, which is three paragraphs, though the latter two could be condensed. It's had some rewriting since then. Let me see what consensus is and I'll figure out what needs to stay, and what needs to go. I'd expect mention of "Little Toyko" to drop entirely from the lead, which addresses the other issue. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:48, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Crisco 1492: Do you not think that given how much of the article mentions some of the musicians and why they make the street notable that's it not worth mentioning some of them? I'm not too bothered either way, but I do like the intro to articles to be informative to the reader without them having to read the entire article.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:52, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'd try and trim to two paragraphs, mention a few who had very strong ties to Denmark Street, but avoid too much name dropping. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:54, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps if you added "Popular musicians often socialised around the Gioconda café at No. 9 Denmark Street, and both David Bowie and the Small Faces have their origins at the café" to one of the paragraphs Rich in your draft that would be a bit better?. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:52, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, have a look now and see what you think. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:08, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Much better. I'll have a look through the references tomorrow (already late here). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:42, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, looks fine!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:12, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Source review
  • The Collet source needs a year of publication and other bibliographic data (for the edition you reference)
Fixed Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 07:15, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • OCLC or ISBN for British Music Education Yearbook?
No idea - the Google Books link doesn't list one. What can we do here? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 07:15, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Checked and now fixed. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:34, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Standardize whether you have hyphens in the ISBNs or not
  • Make sure all of your ISBNs are 13 digit (as preferred by WP:ISBN)
My preference is 978-x-yyy-zzzzz-n and all ISBNs should be in this format now. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 07:15, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Itoh source should only have the page numbers in one of the two footnotes (either in the sfn template or in the cite book template, not both). Also, if this is a whole chapter in an academic book (Routledge articles average 20 pages), I'd be quite surprised if there's not enough material for at least a decent paragraph.
I feared this paragraph would have to be rewritten, and that has proven to be the case. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 07:15, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now the Itoh sfn footnote is not pointing to the book. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:47, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Year was missing from the main citation. Fixed. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:34, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • What makes Tourdates.co.uk a reliable source?
The About us page states "the site also includes high quality editorial content (my emphasis) by kind permission of the team over at LondonTourdates magazine which features artist news, album /venue reviews plus much more." Accompanying text on the review suggests its a reprint of a published magazine. This leads me to believe the review here was done by a professional journalist in good standing. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 07:15, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • My spotchecks reveal no close paraphrasing and show that information is supported. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:33, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. For what it's worth, I think the vast majority of sources can be searched for on Google Books. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 07:15, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alright, that looks to be that. Passing this as a GA. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:36, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent. Many thanks for a thorough and informative GA review that has helped increase the article's quality further. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:43, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent review yup, many thanks Crisco for the good review and Ritchie for addressing the points!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:03, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Denmark_Street/GA1&oldid=615596315"