Talk:Funeral for Yesterday/GA1

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

Nominator: 12:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Cambalachero (talk · contribs) 19:56, 12 July 2024 (UTC)


 * thank you so much for doing this working on this has taken way too long ea dgcfdtbhvbr i very much appreciate this!!! enjoy reviewing Chchcheckit (talk) 20:37, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * also; if you need to check the text sources i.e. metal edge (paccioco 2007) and brave words bloody knuckles (begai 2007a and 2007b) i will type out stuff Chchcheckit (talk) 20:42, 12 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Image review
 * File:Kittie Funeral For Yesterday.jpg Non-free image with rational, but try to add an information template, as that's a usual standard for files.
 * File:Aerial view of Red Bank.jpg
 * File:Morgan Lander of Kittie.jpg


 * Infobox and lead
 * Two chronology sections in the infobox?


 * rationale added and extra chronology removed Chchcheckit (talk) 23:37, 12 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Background
 * "Artemis did not support the band financially during their tours in support of the album..." You said "support" twice, try to reword that.
 * the disagreement about the breakup mentioned in the note may be worth to include in visible text rather than a footnote
 * "...which allowed the band to "test drive" their new songs..." try to avoid using idioms such as "test drive"


 * Recording and production
 * "... the longest time Kittie has spent recording any of their albums" Any of the albums up to that date, or ever? The reference seems to be from the year of the album's release.


 * Composition and lyrics
 * Seems fine

,Promotion
 * "...an "unofficial" music video for the song was released three days later". How can a video released by the band be unofficial?


 * Touring
 * "Kittie intended on touring the United Kingdom supporting Cradle of Filth in April 2007, but pulled out as their record label would not give them any touring support" Their record label? Wasn't that X of Infamy, an indie label belonging to them? Isn't the point of having such a label to avoid exactly this kind of situations?


 * Critical reception
 * Seems fine

I think that's all for now. Cambalachero (talk) 03:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I'll work on this later, here's a few comments:
 * The quote about it being the longest recording time of any Kittie album still holds up; their most recent album, Fire, was recorded in five weeks. Also, citation is based off of two things in Paccioco 2007, first from an early bio segment: "[Funeral for Yesterday] was recorded in New Jersey over six weeks", and then from a later quote from Morgan who states: "This was the longest we've taken to record. The first album [Spit] was nine days and the second [Oracle], two weeks. We've never taken this much time before." Until the End, In the Black and I've Failed You were all recorded in three weeks.
 * The "unofficial" point is as stated by the source. Idk.
 * Yeahhhh I knew that "record label would not give tour support" thing would come up; it's probably down to the band not being transparent about the nature of their record label. In this 2009 interview, Morgan does state that Funeral for Yesterday "was released through a joint effort with another smaller label which was a facilitator to have our own label." Also, in this 2007 article about Sebastian Bach signing to MRV, it states that "MRV's model is designed specifically for artist owned, management owned and independent labels, creating a partnership that provides for all label functions." I didn't include either of these references in the current version of the article due to it being WP:SYNTH. Morgan also complains here about being "in a position where we are on a label that doesn’t want to pay for something like [package tours i.e. Ozzfest and Family Values] because they can’t afford to pay for it." sighhhhh it is what it is. I don't know how to illustrate this point without it being WP:SYNTH but if you know do tell
 * PLEASE COMMENT on the early recording and production section: IS IT NEUTRAL WHEN DISCUSSING THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN KITTIE + JACK PONTI? I had a problem of it being too "attacky" in early versions.
 * Chchcheckit (talk) 13:25, 13 July 2024 (UTC)


 * The points of conflict between Kittie and Ponti seem to be rather minor and trivial, so not something that may tilt neutrality in either way. That was not exactly a James Hetfield vs. Dave Mustaine level of dispute. As of "unofficial", the rules are simple: "official" material is produced or published by the band, "unofficial" material is not (for example, someone recording a concert with a cell phone and uploading to Youtube). Of course that they can say otherwise and pretend that something published by them is "unofficial", but we can't report things that way in wikivoice. It may be simple to just drop the "unofficial" bit and just stick to the part that they uploaded a video. As for the label, it may be better to leave it as it is, then. Cambalachero (talk) 14:21, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay. I’ll probably state it as first and second versions of video then. Chchcheckit (talk) 14:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * also, just noted a discrepancy; i'll need to tweak the "improvised licks" part bc synth. McLeod states playing was "off the cuff" in Premier Guitar and McCallum 2017, but Paccioco 2007 is referencing a quote by Morgan: "there's a lot of spontaneity with the recording. There was this kind of thing where [Jack Ponti] he would point at TM to play a lick. Just making it up as she went along." I will sort this. Chchcheckit (talk) 15:02, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Alright, all above points have been fixed. The footnote thing was removed because it is ultimately trivial. the Hiatus point stands. Chchcheckit (talk) 15:23, 15 July 2024 (UTC)