Talk:VIVIsectVI/GA1

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

Reviewer: Homeostasis07 (talk · contribs) 00:25, 8 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi. I'll be reviewing this over the next couple of hours. Just skimming the article, it looks to be in pretty great shape. Will write more here as I go ... did it all in one go: Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:25, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Infobox and lead:
 * Sources for everything in the infobox found in article prose.
 * "Despite tackling controversial topics..." reads like a run-on sentence, and there's quite a hefty chunk of the article's content squashed into that one sentence. Maybe everything there could be expanded slightly? For one, it'd probably be better if you could find a way of explaining that "Dogshit" and "Censor" were actually the same song.

Background
 * All grouped references should be in numerical order, i.e. at Mushroom Studios, Vancouver in mid-1988.[7][6]. I see other instances of this happening in 'Composition' (refs 19 and 18), in 'Themes and lyrics' (ref 42 followed by 12), in 'Live performances' (ref 53 followed by 39; ref 56 followed by 14; ref 54 followed by 52), 'Critical reception' ("[39][53][48]") and in 'Track listing' ("Sample(s)[37][62][20][25]")
 * "to something more abrasive, industrial, and complex." sounds a bit Weasel-ish. Can you change this to "... to a more elaborate form of abrasive industrial music."
 * I don't really understand "The lyrical and thematic elements of the music were refined and made more of a focus on the album." Can you find a way to re-word?
 * "(Ogre's)" can be removed, since he's name-checked earlier that same sentence so it's obvious the sentence is referring to him.

Composition and content
 * "...album that is at once rhythmically simple and deeply layered, repetitive and aurally complex." Again, this reads quite weasel-y. Can it be rephrased to be a bit more blunt/direct?
 * I'm happy with the prose for rest of this section, including 'Samples' and 'Themes and lyrics'

Artwork
 * I once seen a user going through every single Wikipedia article and removing every use of the word "comprised" from the website. I didn't understand why they bothered doing that, and I personally have no problem with you using it. But if you see a random user coming along to the article after promotion and changing that word alone, now you know why. ;)

Live performances
 * "doing vocals" and "manning the synthesizers" seem a bit too informal/colloqual... "with Ogre on vocals, Goettel on percussion, and Key performing synthesizer." maybe?
 * Brilliantly written section. Fascinating, even. The level of hypocracy left me shaking my head.

Release, Track listing and Personnel
 * Nothing I'd change here.

Chart positions
 * Made a minor edit to this section.

References
 * Please see the point in 'Background' for an issue related to this section.
 * Is ref 7 ("Wired Special – cEvin Key of Skinny Puppy") a TV special or web/magazine interview? If it's web/mag, then this ref needs an ISSN, which are both available at Wired (magazine).
 * Ref 14 ("A Doggone Close Call for L.A.'s Skinny Puppy". Chicago Tribune.) is available online, here. Probably a good idea to include the URL if it's available.
 * I'm happy with the rest of the references (both formatting and quality), although I'm not too keen on ref 62 (skinnypuppy.eu: a fan site). It's only used to confirm the samples, but if a better source can be found, I'd suggest using that. I'm not gonna make a big deal about it if you keep it, though.

Images
 * Infobox image has appropriate FUR.
 * Sound files have appropriate FURs also.
 * I was sketchy about the band photo in 'Composition', but I see from the FUR that Dave Ogilvie is camera-shy, so I'm happy to leave it there for identification purposes. Maybe you could expand the caption to state who is who?
 * The "test shot" in 'Artwork' could use a more descriptive caption too. Why is it important to have another non-free image there?

Copyright
 * Earwig's Copyvio Detector tool: "No matching sources found." 5 sources hovering around the 20.6-26.5% range (green/"no violation likely"); all direct quotations, which the article keeps to a minimum.

I'm happy to pass this once the key issues are resolved/responded to. Well done with the article, I listened to some Skinny Puppy's work years ago, but couldn't really get into anything other than "Assimilate", "Fascist Jock Itch", "Tin Omen", and a couple of songs off their then-recent album ("Politikil" and "Ugli"). Knowing a bit more about their history might inspire me to give all their albums another listen... starting with this one. ;) Homeostasis07 (talk) 02:04, 8 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much for this review! You brought up some fantastic points, and the article is better now for it. I believe I addressed everything. I agree with you on the dubious sample reference, by the way. I've been looking for good alternatives for a while. If I can't find one soon, I'll take it out. Thanks again, and let me know if I missed anything! CelestialWeevil (talk) 00:34, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks I'm satisfied with the changes you've made to the article. Happy to promote now. Well done! Homeostasis07 (talk) 02:00, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Formatting
 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: