Talk:Post-punk revival/GA1

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

Reviewer: Tea with toast (talk · contribs) 18:28, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * ---I am impressed by how well-developed the prose is. Nice work.
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * ---I'm always happy when I review articles and find all the references nicely cited and easily verifiable. Thanks, it makes my job much easier!
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * 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 where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * ---Well done! Please see comments below for further areas of improvement. -- Tea with toast  (話)  19:26, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 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 where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * ---Well done! Please see comments below for further areas of improvement. -- Tea with toast  (話)  19:26, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * ---Well done! Please see comments below for further areas of improvement. -- Tea with toast  (話)  19:26, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Additional comments
I am happy to find this article to be in such good shape. However, it is a bit short, and I feel like there could be more content added. Here are some ideas:
 * There are other punk-inspired genres, such as emo and Riot grrrl, that developed during this same period of post-punk revival. I think it would be worth including information about their relevance.
 * I think it would be very relevant to include information about the cultural context of post-punk revival. There is some interesting information from the article on punk rock that could be used as a starting point here. You might discuss more about how the commercialization of the genre (such as the rise of Hot Topic) helped spur its growth, or about the resurgence of some of the philosophical roots of the genre (rebellion, anti-establishment, DIY) that might be relevant here. Of course, you'll want to avoid WP:OR, but I think there are sources that exist that could develop this aspect of the topic.

Thanks for your efforts, good luck, and happy editing! -- Tea with toast  (話)  19:26, 6 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for the review and for the very helpful comments. I will work on them in the near future.--  SabreBD  (talk) 20:11, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

If you check the original source material "The Hellacopters, Backyard Babies and Soundtrack of Our Lives from Sweden"- are not specified as NW bands. Anyone who is familiar with their music will know they are not NW or PP by any stretch of the imagination, I suggest removing them entirely. If the intention is to draw attention to Swedish acts in this genre I recommend The Sounds. Bunnyman78 (talk) 08:52, 5 November 2012 (UTC)