Wikipedia:Peer review/The Vines/archive1

The Vines
This article has undergone substantial revisions and before we go any farther, I would like to get some input as to how to improve the article. Arundhati lejeune 11:26, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Review by CloudNine
Several issues:


 * Lead
 * The lead is too short as it stands. It should be expanded to two or three paragraphs (per WP:LEAD). The first paragraph should name the original and current members (if possible), along with the instruments they play. Try to summarise the band's history and musical style in the second and perhaps third paragraph.
 * The infobox logo should be removed, as it's hard to justify under fair use.
 * "notable for producing a raw musical hybrid of 60s rock and 90s alternative with the band being popularly promoted as "The Beatles meets Nirvana". This is uncited; could be construed as original research.
 * The promotional photo of the band is much too big, and could be replaced with a free image (check out Flickr or the Wikimedia Commons).
 * Reading through the article, surely Joe Dirt is an "also known as", rather than an associated act?


 * Early days
 * This section is general is vague.
 * "mid-1990s" is a little vague; surely the band members should have some idea of the year of forming?
 * who named the band "the Vines"? When was it done?


 * Highly Evolved
 * On my screen, the first paragraph of this section is thirteen lines long. Needs to be split for readability.
 * "in their native land". Australia should be fine here.
 * "with record companies only considering the release of an EP." Which record companies? Why?
 * "The Vines then signed with Heavenly Records in the United Kingdom." When? This and the previous section both need dates.
 * Several low-value links in this section; "single", "hype" and "production" don't need to be linked in a band article. There may be other examples throughout the article


 * Winning Days
 * "after Craig bleated at the crowd, calling them sheep," sounds strange to me. "bleated" doesn't sound too formal. The sentence it is part of is also quite a long run-on sentence. This needs splitting.
 * Also, the chart positions each album and single reached (particularly in Winning Days) don't need to be mentioned (unless they debuted at #1 or something equally notable); it makes the Discography section redundant.


 * Vision Valley
 * Why are the singles bulletpointed? Needs converting to prose.
 * "In November, the band's management announced they had finished recording all the songs that will be on the album." Sounds awkward, needs rephrasing.


 * Asperger's Syndrome
 * This section (along with "The Return" and "New Album") should a subsection of History.
 * Why did it stop him? Did any music magazines comment on this? I was confused after reading this section.


 * The return
 * Needs clearing up. Covers individual gigs (a sign of [[WP:RECENT|recentism), and is full of one or two line paragraphs.
 * Does New album need its own section? It would flow just as well as part of "The return".


 * Musical style
 * The article needs a description of the band's general musical style. Who writes most of the material? What are the main characteristics of the band? Who are their influences? etc.


 * Band members
 * This section could be summarised in the infobox and lead. See Pearl Jam for how this can be achieved.


 * Discography
 * Unfortunately the album covers need to go; a gallery of album covers can't be justified under fair use. See Pixies or any other alternative music featured article to see how this section should be formatted.
 * Why is the "Song" column of the Singles section so wide? It's unclear.
 * Album names in the Singles section need italics for consistency


 * Covers by The Vines
 * To me, this is a trivia section in disguise; it doesn't have much value in an encyclopedia, and is probably incomplete. (Note it doesn't mention the Nirvana covers that the earliest incarnation of the band performed). My advice is to remove it.


 * External links
 * I'm not sure about linking to the "Vines FAQ" or the Myspace page; I've not seen many quality band articles that do.
 * If you do find some free images, add a Wikicommons link to the section.
 * A Wikiquote link might also be appropriate.


 * In general
 * Direct quotes, statistics and facts need to be cited. The article needs more citations. See Citing sources for more on this; I can add [citation needed] tags if you want.
 * I would replace the album cover captions with "  Album name  (year)", to help those skimming through the article to get an idea of dates. (Plus "album cover of" is redundant)
 * The prose covering the album should summarise the musical style of the material.
 * All the album covers need fair use rationale. (See "Lead" for an explanation)
 * I've noticed quite a few redundant words throughout the article. See " the group had reported ("announced") that they were working on their third album with producer Wayne Connolly." See User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a for a much more detailed guide.

The article needs a lot of work; this should be enough for now. Let me know if you disagree or desire clarification of any of the points raised. CloudNine 13:30, 6 July 2007 (UTC)