Wikipedia:Peer review/Pink Moon/archive1

Pink Moon
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because… My friend and I Elisunshine01 have made significant changes to the Pink Moon article, nearly an entire rewrite (about 90%). Such a drastic edit that the current status doesn't apply. We did this as fans of Nick Drake and the album and also because the album is in the Rolling Stones top 500 albums of all time. It is the goal of Wiki:Albums to get all those album articles to at least a GA status.

Pink Moon is a fascinating story of an artist, depression, misinterpretation and posthumous fame. The article simply deserved more than what it had.

We welcome advice and critique. This is our first Wikipedia endeavor...you may want to hold back on the newbies, don't, we can take it.

Thanks so much, we truly appreciate any attention to this we get, Pugsly8000 (talk) 01:01, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Suggestions generated by an automatic JavaScript program
- (t)  Josve05a  (c)  00:00, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Suggestions by other Wikipedia users
The references list needs tidying up quite a bit - I'll see if I can help out. Of the album reviews listed, the Sputnikmusic one is not valid as it is by a user of the site, not one of the staff, and I doubt the Music Box review is allowable either (but check). I see you've referenced Trevor Dann's book but I think the other two major Drake biographies, Patrick Humphries' Nick Drake: The Biography (1998) and Gorm Henrik Rasmussen's Pink Moon, a Story about Nick Drake (English version 2012), may well help fill in some more of the details about the album, if you can get hold of them. Richard3120 (talk) 03:10, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for your review and advice! This is new to me...I will check also if Sputnikmusic is a valid user and also Music Box review. Thanks again for your advice, it is respected and appreciated. I will not take it lightly and will get to work on it right away. Pugsly8000 (talk) 01:27, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Suggestions from LT910001
Thanks for your updates and edits to this page and Wikipedia! Having had a quick look, there don't seem to be any problems with the lead, prose, the content of the article, or the images. As stated above, there are some areas without sources, which will need sources to get to GA status. I'd encourage you, once the issue with references has been dealt with, to nominate for GA status, and wish you all the best. Kind regards, --LT910001 (talk) 15:08, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I'd love to nominate it for a GA, but not really sure of the process. I will get on the references and see what I can do there and then get to work on learning the GA process. MUCH appreciation to you for looking at this for us. Also, as a side note, you taught me what a WikiOtter is (I looked at your userpage) and that is pretty damn cool. Pugsly8000 (talk) 01:29, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! To nominate for GA, copy and paste this: at the top of the article's talk page. More thorough instructions are available here (WP:GAN/I). A list of good articles is available here (WP:GA), and there you will be able to find similar articles relating to music and see how they are. Unfortunately, there is a backlog, especially amongst music articles, so you may hit the next stage of life whilst waiting for a review. The upside to this is you have ample time to read and re-read the article, and the end-of-year period will certainly not be interrupted by a review for you. Good luck! --LT910001 (talk) 03:38, 11 December 2013 (UTC)