Talk:Discovery (Daft Punk album)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 12:44, 22 February 2018 (UTC)


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * "As a result of sales," - this is redundant, I'd lose it
 * "and peaked within the top ten on seven other charts" - a couple examples would be nice
 * "in their trademark pyramid" - what is their trademark pyramid? This is confusing for people unfamiliar with the duo
 * I don't know what to say. I mean, it was quite easy to find on Google, and I know the point is to try avoiding that, but I just don't know how to describe it. It's a structure they perform in, not much more.  danny music editor  Speak up! 20:20, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I've reworded it myself. :) Freikorp (talk) 06:00, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * Inconsistent reference formatting. Some reference use Template:Cite web, others do not
 * Reference 52 (RIAA) is dead and needs to be updated
 * Reference 55 (Daft Punk Embraces Universal Themes) is dead. An archived version is given, however, the reference needs to be formatted with Cite web and then given the 'deadurl=yes' parameter
 * Is this the only ref formed without Cite web, or are there more?  danny music editor  Speak up! 18:23, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I can only see one other - French Touch Information. Freikorp (talk) 00:16, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually that source doesn't back up the claim it is supposed to, though the claim is backed up by another source there. I've removed it. Freikorp (talk) 00:41, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
 * This is frequently overlooked (presumably because the interview is a series of images, not text that can easily be CTRL-F’d) but DJ Sneak specifically says "...I sat back and wrote the lyrics to Digital Love [...] I also co-produced the music..." jhsounds (talk) 01:43, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The Reesman, Bryan source does not list a work or publisher, neither does "Daft Punk speak out on sample sources: 'half of this list is not true'"
 * The interview video in the external links section is dead
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * The last two sentences in the 'Background' section are unsourced
 * I'm conflicted. I have no idea if any web references are available for that information and have no idea where to look for it. If I remove it, I have one sentence for background. Isn't Background essential for the article? I'm stumped, and this would really suck if this was the reason it failed, but I'm not going after books/print to find this.  danny music editor  Speak up! 20:20, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I can completely understand you not wanting to go after sources for this since you are not the nominator. However your assessment is right, I can't really pass this if the background section is only one sentence. There are still some remaining issues with sources, prose and major aspects so I might make a look for sources on background myself while you work on the remaining issues. Freikorp (talk) 06:05, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
 * "and assisted in the song's production" - this is unsourced (problem addressed)
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * Whatever happened to the Daft Club? This would be interesting for the reader to know. (technically addressed, based on firsthand knowledge)
 * This information is good, but it still needs a reference. Freikorp (talk) 21:11, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * There are so many unrelated fansites named 'Daft Club' that I will likely find zilch about what I'm looking for. Did find a nifty screenshot of what it looked like but no real encyclopedic info.  danny music editor  Speak up! 18:29, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I found a source that the Daft Club ended in 2003 and that most of the tracks were later compiled into the album Daft Club. I've added it to the article. Freikorp (talk) 00:33, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: Placing on hold until issues are addressed. Freikorp (talk) 13:14, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi It's been well over a week, do you think you'll need much more time to address the issues? Freikorp (talk) 13:02, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Will do my best to finish this tomorrow - chances are I will, because Spring break has arrived. (More like a second winter break.)  danny music editor  Speak up! 03:35, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi . So we've got 2 remaining issues in section 1, 3 in section 2, and 1 in section 3, not including the background section being unsourced. As mentioned above since this isn't your original nomination I'll be happy to spent a little time looking for sources for the background section myself while you work on the other issues. Freikorp (talk) 06:08, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
 * This source should help you with the 'Background' section. Let me know if it's not enough. Freikorp (talk) 08:53, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Just a heads up. I can't possibly justify keeping this open for more than a month, so if everything isn't addressed by March 22 I'll unfortunately have to fail the nomination. I know that's still a week and a half away, but I thought I'd give you as much notice as possible. Have to draw a line somewhere. Freikorp (talk) 10:48, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the two minor outstanding issues myself, and accordingly I'm happy for this to be passed now. :) Freikorp (talk) 00:43, 15 March 2018 (UTC)