Wikipedia:Peer review/Shoot for the Stars, Aim for the Moon/archive1

Shoot for the Stars, Aim for the Moon


I've listed this article for peer review because I want the article to be FA status before I leave Wikipedia in the summer. I'm dedicating this to Pop Smoke, a rapper who was shot and killed at only 20 years old. ShootForTheStars (talk) 06:40, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, ShootForTheStars (talk) 06:40, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Comments from Gerda
Thank you for the invitation, - I am not at all familiar with the topic, which sometimes is helpful ;) - Also, I'm no native speaker of English, when I ask "what does it mean" I often just don't know a term. - I'll look at the lead last (perhaps tomorrow), after knowing more.

Infobox
 * I am a bit confused about the many names and locations under Studio, and the many names under Producer, and for both parameters how many are not linked. I'm normally no friend of collapsing, but wonder if in this case it might help focus.
 * The album was recorded in different parts of the world, while every track was produced by many different producers.
 * Yes, I understand, but would collapsing be an option. Compare Elizabeth II. Repeating: I'm unfamiliar with the topic, and all these names tell me nothing before reading further, especially the unlinked ones. - Those who would recognize something could click "show" and see. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that would be against WP:DONTHIDE, especially in album-related articles. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 09:18, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
 * As said above, I am strongly against collapsing, and it's now less of a problem if any after the image was moved. I'm still puzzled by the amount of information for insiders only, so early in the article. An unlinked name of some producer tells me exactly nothing, but that's just me. It may be good for others. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:20, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
 * TheAmazingPeanuts, how can I explain all the producers who don't have articles? ShootForTheStars (talk) 05:13, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Let me explain: I don't want them explained. I had suggested to collapse the parameter, to take less room and tell a new user less how little she knows. (There are probably readers who know by a name what a producer stands for.) I had thought it would help the sandwiching problem, but you found a much better solution, not moving the image down a bit but moving it down a lot. That cured the concern also, sort of. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:32, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think that is something you need to worry about, there are other articles don't have a producer linked in the infobox, such as Aaliyah and 4. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:49, 6 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I think the chronology would look better if the two items were horizontal.
 * Forgive me, but I have no idea how to do that.
 * alright ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Background
 * I'm used to better no sandwiching of text between image and infobox. Could the image of 50 Cent come later? He is not mentioned in the first sentences.
 * I moved it to the "Recording" section.


 * Last paragraph: I think it would be better to first say what the foundation is, and then that the family would continue.
 * Changed

Recording
 * The infobox tells me that Meet the Woo came first, then Shoot for the Stars. That's not clear from the first sentences. Add years? Switch sentences?
 * Added the years for both mixtapes


 * "to show the world" - is that a quote? Why not just "to show"?
 * Changed


 * Why say "Prior to his murder," instead of simply describing what was planned.
 * Removed


 * "To ensure the album's release, 50 Cent told Victor that if he was not mentally ready to complete the project, he would executive produce the album." - it's not clear without thinking who the two "he" are, - and what does "mentally" add to "ready"?
 * Added "the rapper", and what "mentally" adds to "ready" is that Steven Victor was still grieving Pop Smoke's death and would have a very hard time hearing his voice. 50 Cent took over the project because he was a mentor to Pop Smoke. 50 Cent said in multiple interviews that Pop Smoke reminded him of himself.


 * "When it came time to sequence" - a phrase I don't know
 * It means "Sequencing includes defining the silence between songs, crafting fade-ins and outs between tracks and choosing the order of music on a release."
 * Thank you, makes sense, - I just had forgotten that this was mentioned before, and understood sequence in the normal way. I looked if the specific meaning has an article, but no. Perhaps there could be some redirect? Sequence (album making) - you find a better dab ;) - to be used in the lead and on first occurrence? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 5 May 2021 (UTC)


 * "They worked cooperated to sequence" - meant to be one of the words?
 * Removed "worked"


 * "each song is in time with one another" - what does that mean?
 * It means that when one song finishes, its segue is a seamless transition between to the other.

Title and artwork
 * link Complex again?
 * Unlinked


 * "his mother" - whose, Ripps'? ... explain why?
 * Added "Pop Smoke's mother"

Release and promotion
 * "He and his team intended to have the album of the summer." - what does it mean?
 * Pop Smoke and his team wanted the album to the most heard and popular album of summer 2020
 * Could that come out better, for us ignorants? "... wanted to make it"? - still a weak verb, I bet you'll find something --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 5 May 2021 (UTC)


 * "Before his murder, the album would have released on Memorial Day." - would have been released? ... and don't forget that only Americans know about when that day is.
 * Added been and added that Memorial day is an American holiday


 * The following "Originally" reads to me like more precise about that, but reading further, seems to mean the changed plan. Could that come across better?
 * Reworded the sentence


 * "His estate" - whose?
 * Added "Pop Smoke's estate"

Reception
 * "Gary Suarez stated with even if the album is not what Pop Smoke had created," - find the "with" irritating
 * Removed "with"

Accolades
 * Why are two publications not italic? I'm used to websites also italic.
 * When you click on both the publication's articles, they are not in italic.

Notes
 * Why are the footnote letter bold?
 * Looking at some FA articles like 1989. I think that's how it is supposed to go.
 * fine, I just never read down so far ;)

Thank you for this impressive work of love! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:35, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

New day, and I looked at the lead. I'd write it differently (of course):
 * The corner starting "His family", and about the foundation: "His" at that point refers to 50 Cent. I'd say that the album title is taken from the foundation. The family seems not even lead-worthy (to me).
 * Reworded the entire sentence.


 * I think saying only that 50 Cent called ... and took care of deadlines, seems too little.
 * Added more info about 50 Cent helping with the album


 * I'd mention Jess Jackson (record producer), the person who did the giant effort of sifting the material and making the album.
 * Added


 * I'd say less detail about the charts, more summary, and "In addition to the positive criticism," + full name of album again is a waste of space, instead of "The album".
 * Reworded
 * I reads much better for me, thank you. No more details about the lead now, which is often the part changed the most. I will look again in the FAC. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Generally:
 * Sometimes you could just say "the album", or Shoot for the Stars.
 * Changed some to "the album"


 * Could you add a bit about the character of the music? (Perhaps that's just me, and yes, I know the problem.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:56, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Can you explain what you mean by this?
 * I write about music a lot, and feel the difficulty of describing how it actually sound. My best example for trying is here, - not in an article that is. We have to avoid OR, so it needs to be supported by others writing about it. Perhaps a few more more ideas from reviews ... - or just leave it.

Gerda Arendt thanks so much for your review. I am very happy that an experienced editor is helping make the article even better. Let me know if anything else needs to be fixed. ShootForTheStars (talk)
 * Thank you so much for the many changes. I replied above, and most often that I understand, and no reply also means I understand. - What do you think of changing your user name to User:Shoot for the Stars? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Gerda Arendt I added some more info about the album's genre and added a link to "sequence" in the lead and recording sections. I tried to change my username to Shoot for the Stars, but they said I couldn't. ShootForTheStars (talk) 05:13, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You are ShootForTheStars for me, - call me Gerda ;) (no ping needed unless I don't respond in days). Thank you for the explanation, and I hope I was clear in my latest above, about the infobox. Compare Joseph (opera). That's an infobox some found too obtrusive, so it arrived only yesterday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I prefer ShootForTheStars over my current username :p. How do you think the article looks now? ShootForTheStars (talk) 05:53, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Fine by me, - see you at the FAC. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:11, 6 May 2021 (UTC)