Wikipedia:Peer review/Geogaddi/archive1

Geogaddi


I've listed this article for peer review because I want to get it to GA status. I plan to nominate pages related to Boards of Canada altogether for good topic status.

Thanks, Davest3r08 > : )  (talk)  13:06, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Comments from Z1720
Comments after a quick skim:

The "Reception" section falls into the "X said Y" pattern and relies on quotes. I suggest reading WP:RECEPTION for some ideas on how to reformat this. ✅ Davest3r08 > : )  ( t a l k ) 01:04, 26 December 2023 (UTC) I hope this helps. Z1720 (talk) 22:42, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 * "All tracks are written by Marcus Eoin and Michael Sandison" Needs a citation ✅ Davest3r08 > : )  ( t a l k ) 01:45, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * "Personnel" section needs a citation ✅ Davest3r08 > : )  ( t a l k ) 01:45, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * What makes " "Hauntology: The Past Inside The Present"" a reliable source? Source removed due to it being self-published: ✅ Davest3r08 > : )  ( t a l k ) 01:37, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Suggest archiving the sources using IA Bot. ✅ Davest3r08 > : )  ( t a l k ) 01:37, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Citations in the lede are usually not necessary if they are cited in the article body, so I suggest taking these out. ✅  Davest3r08 > : )  ( t a l k ) 01:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * In the infobox, Warp101 is listed as a label but this is not cited in the article. ❌: It seems that an editor confused the catalogue number with the label.
 * @Z1720, I would like some feedback on this rewrite of the "Reception" section: "Geogaddi holds a score of 84 out of 100 from review aggregate site Metacritic based on 21 critics' reviews, indicating 'universal acclaim'. Kitty Empire of NME named it 'the electronic album of the year.' Mark Richardson of Pitchfork gave the album an 8.6 out of 10, noting its change in mood. Pascal Wyse of The Guardian characterised it as 'the band's own reticent blend of electronic melancholy, always organic and beautifully crafted.' Geogaddi was ranked on year-end lists of the best albums of 2002 by numerous publications, such as Mojo, NME, Uncut and The Wire. In 2014, Vice described the album as mourning 'the idea of a utopian innocence as a possibility.' In 2017, Pitchfork placed Geogaddi at number five on its list of 'The 50 Best IDM Albums of All Time'." Davest3r08 > : )  ( t a l k ) 14:15, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * This reception section still uses the "X said Y" pattern for most of the sentences. I would try to find more reviews of the work and follow WP:RECEPTION's suggestion of grouping similar comments together. For example, if multiple reviewers praised the album as innovative, this can be mentioned in a sentence and referenced to multiple sources afterwards. WP:RECEPTION has some great tips on how to do this. Z1720 (talk) 16:42, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Z1720, what about this one? "Geogaddi recieved critical acclaim upon release. Geogaddi holds a score of 84 out of 100 from review aggregate site Metacritic based on 21 critics' reviews, indicating 'universal acclaim'. Comparisons were drawn between the album and Music Has the Right to Children, especially with both albums' cover art. It was also praised the use of samples, as critics felt that it fit the tone of the album. Critics at Q compared Geogaddi to Drukqs by Aphex Twin. Geogaddi was ranked on year-end lists of the best albums of 2002 by numerous publications, such as Mojo, NME, Uncut and The Wire. In 2017, Pitchfork placed Geogaddi at number five on its list of 'The 50 Best IDM Albums of All Time'."— Davest3r08 > : )  ( t a l k ) 23:36, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * This one is a lot better. Z1720 (talk) 23:42, 25 December 2023 (UTC)