Wikipedia:Peer review/List of songs recorded by Phil Ochs/archive1

List of Phil Ochs songs
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to nominate it for consideration as a Featured List, but I would like the benefit of a peer review first.

Thanks, — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 06:35, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Overall it looks impressive, but a few problems suggest themselves:-
 * Lead
 * I am slightly cofused as to the composition of the list. The lead begins: "American singer-songwriter Phil Ochs ... wrote or recorded at least 238 songs..." Later in the lead you say: "This is a list of all songs recorded by Ochs that have been officially released". Did he write songs that weren't recorded or released. If so, I would expect the lead to begin something like: "American singer-songwriter Phil Ochs ... wrote or recorded at least 238 songs during his brief career, of which xxx were released as recordings".
 * Related to that point: you mention Joan Baez in the middle of the lead. Can you clarify whether your list includes recordings of Ochs's songs by other artists, or only when Ochs was one of the performers?
 * Prose style point: It would be better to begin "The American singer-songwriter..." rather than "American..."
 * List
 * The information in the "Recordings" column is not clearly presented. For instance, am I to assume in the first entry that Gunfight at Carnegie Hall is the album name? Or was it the name of the live event? In the second entry we have: "On My Way (2010, recorded 1963). To what does the date 2010 refer? Why a different format from the information in the first entry?
 * I feel that the information might be clearer if the information in the "Recordings" column was subdivided among several columns, such as "Album title"; "Date written"; "Date recorded" etc
 * The decision to use alphabetically organised segments is marginally useful for finding individual song titles, but as the list is in alphabetical order, titles could be quite quickly found anyway. What you miss out on in this format, however, is a "sortable" function which would enable the list to be considered from other than an alphabetical perspective. For example, if the dates were properly columnised it would be possible for a reader to sort the list by date of composition, or by date of recording.
 * Why are there wikilinks to the "See also" and "References" sections?
 * Image
 * Why are the copyright tags and fair use rationales triplicated on the image page?
 * Is there any evidence for the assertion that "Photographer has agreed to give Wikipedia full rights to use the photograph as it wishes, as many times as it wishes..."?
 * In the fair use rationale, "illustrate article" is not a sufficient justification for use. If this was Och's biographical article, an identifying image of the subject would be acceptable non-free use. But this is a list of (some of) his songs, and it can be argued that the image is irrelevant to readers' understanding of the list.

I hope you find this review useful. As I am not able to watch individual peer review pages, please contact me via my talkpage if you wish to raise issues from this review, or if you wish me to look at it again. Brianboulton (talk) 16:14, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Why is the Works cited and Further reading sects in small font? There is really not enough size in those lists for that to be needed. -- Cirt (talk) 18:56, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment on sizing of references