Wikipedia:Peer review/His Band and the Street Choir/archive1

His Band and the Street Choir
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review to see if anything needs adding to the article, needs correcting or general improvements before its GA review.

Thanks, Kitchen roll (talk) 16:13, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Comments by A Stop at Willoughby This is a thorough article, but some work needs to be done before it's nominated at WP:GAN. My first impression of the "Composition" section is that it is need of a copy-edit, and that it's somewhat disorganized. I don't have much time right now, but I'll add to this review tomorrow. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 03:36, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Comments by I.M.S. - A nice looking article on one of my favorite albums. Here's my review:


 * Dab links:
 * Disambiguate Moonlight Mile to Moonlight Mile (film) [I imagine]
 * No other dead or dab links


 * Lead
 * Rework to conform with WP:LEAD. Three paragraphs is probably too much for an article of this size - consider merging them into two.


 * Recording
 * Perhaps elaborate on what the "Street Choir" is early on, or in the lead.
 * Drummer Dahaud Shaar was a survivor [change to "veteran", perhaps] from the Moondance tour, but he did not play on the album itself. - I don't think he deserves mention, then. If the only reason he's mentioned in the main text is because he appears in the photo, then I'd move this bit to the caption.
 * I don't think there's a need to link to "wife"
 * As I mentioned earlier, I think explanation of the Street Choir is required early on. When you mention personnel, also elaborate on the Choir at the same moment, explaining who was in it, etc. immediately after the band. It takes a while to understand who the Choir really are. I would also remove quotation marks from the group's name.
 * It was originally a concept to do an a cappella album,...Street Choir was going to be an a capella group. I wanted these guys to form an a cappella group so that I could cut a lot of songs with just maybe one guitar. But it didn't turn out." - are all those "an a"s typographical errors or parts of the original text? You might want to make it clear that you are referring to "a cappella" - perhaps explain to the casual reader what an a cappella is. Also, the ellipses ,... --> ... with a space on each side (See WP:MOS)


 * Composition
 * It seems these are profiles of each song. I would recommend moving chart info to the sales section, recording info to the recording section, and rearrange this section so that it chronologically details Morrison's writing of the songs.
 * The song "is sweet and mournful, with Van wringing real need out of the simple words." (Hinton) --> Hinton described the song as...


 * For the rest, consider restructuring as follows:


 * ==Release and aftermath==
 * ===Packaging===
 * ===Critical response===
 * ===Influence===

--Hope this helps. Great job on the article, Kitchen Roll! Although it looks nice, I do second the points raised above by Willoughby-a little more effort, and the article should pass through GAN fine. I might be back later with a few more comments. - I.M.S. (talk) 17:45, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Also - I would expand the FUR of this file, and reduce its size. - I.M.S. (talk) 04:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the great feadback and points for improvement! I was just wondering about the "an a cappella" quote - its a little confuzing - as "a cappella" is a vocal group without musical backing, should I make this clear in the article so the reader doesn't misunderstand all the an's and a's? Also how do you reduce the size of image files? Thanks again Kitchen roll (talk) 17:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes - you might want to make it clear that "a cappella" is meant (I didn't phrase myself correctly in my review), and not an a "cappela". as for the image - I'll reduce it for you (usually there's a "change image size" feature in photo editors like Photoshop and Image Suite). - I.M.S. (talk) 18:18, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I've reduced the image size for you. - I.M.S. (talk) 04:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've made the changes you suggested for the article. Is there anything else that needs doing? Kitchen roll (talk) 19:38, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Good idea - it makes it more clear definately. What do you think of the "composition" section now I've moved some of the material? Thanks Kitchen roll (talk) 13:34, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about the wait—I think your recent additions look fine. The article should do well at GA. I would, however, suggest looking at the list of copyeditors, and ask someone to look over the page (and perhaps copyedit it) to give you more a thorough ironing of the article.
 * That's alright. Thanks for the tips and link. Kitchen roll (talk) 14:34, 30 January 2010 (UTC)