Talk:Public Strain/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 07:28, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Good Article
review progress box
WP:CV
()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4.
free or tagged images
() 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the
Good Article criteria. Criteria marked
are unassessed

A review of this coming later on today! --K. Peake 07:28, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

  • September 28 is not sourced as the exact release date anywhere in the body
Added ref in release section
  • "and final album" → "and final studio album"
Done
  • The production part should be in the recording sentence instead
See below
  • "on September 28, 2010, on" → "on September 28, 2010, via" but again, the exact release date is not sourced
Done
  • Remove VanGaalen's label introduction because this is not needed in the lead when it's in the body already
Done
  • "Public Strain was recorded during a" → "The album was recorded during a"
done
  • "8-month recording process" the body seems to source around 10 months, not eight
Added efn
  • Regarding the production merger, do something like adding a semi-colon then write "produced by Chad VanGaalen."
Now it's: "The album was produced by Chad VanGaalen and recorded during a period of isolation for the band..."
  • "It is noted for its key and time signature changes," → "It has been noted for the key changes and vocal delivery," or something else notable per only one song having the signature mentioned, with the target
done
Done
  • Remove late artist intro to Ray Johnson per the body being sufficient
Done
  • "are described as" → "were described as"
Done
Done
  • "The instrumentation on the album is" → "The instrumentation is"
Done
  • No feedback is sourced in the body and only one song is mentioned as featured reverberation, so reword or source more info
Just reworded
  • "The tour for the album would" → "An accompanying tour would"
Done
  • "lead to the band's disbanding" → "lead to Women's disbanding"
Done
  • It needs to be mentioned directly in the body that the album failed to chart, rather than just no positions listed
I can't find a source that says that the album failed to chart explicitly, but the album never charted other than in the earshot chart. Should I just remove this?
I would suggest so, as everything in the leads needs to be written out in the body and the !earshot chart is not notable. --K. Peake 08:59, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There we go
  • "have labeled the album" → "have labeled Public Strain"
done
  • "Eyesore" being retrospectively praised is not backed up in the body
Moved part in music section to legacy section, hopefully that is sufficient
Yeah, this should do it. --K. Peake 08:59, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Public Strain has received" → "the album has received
Done
  • The impact is sourced in the body, but it being on indie artists and mentioned by personnel/recording is not
Added more info in legacy section
Does not appear to have any mention of indie artists, even if you have added VanGallen for the latter part. --K. Peake 08:59, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I clarified this a bit. Does this read fine now?

Background and recording

Done
  • Mention the name of their debut studio album
Done
  • "the band members lived" → "the members lived"
Done
Done
  • The name of the studio space is not mentioned by the source
Whoops. Cite added
  • "which led to the band" → "which led to them"
Done
  • "as a "slog," but with similar or the same experimentation techniques as the band's first record." → "as a "slog", but with similar or the same experimentation techniques as Women." per
    MOS:QUOTE
Done
  • "acknowledged the band's influence" → "acknowledged Women's influence"
Done
  • [4] should be solely at the end of the para per it being used for the last two sentences
Done
  • Remove overly obvious wikilink on India
Done
  • "the album varies with" → "Public Strain varies with"
Done
  • "that the band members would" → "that the band members did"
Done
  • Add the interview source to the quote to avoid OR
Done
  • "Most of the album was" → "Most of Public Strain was"
Done
  • "on the bands intended sound," → "of Women's intended sound,"
Done
  • "growing incredibly paranoid."" should only have the punctuation inside speech marks if it is the end of a full sentence quoted
Done
  • Wikilink Flemish Eye and mention it being VanGaalen's label here
Done
  • "for creating the album." → "for creating Public Strain."
Done
Done
Done

Music and lyrics

Done
  • [9] should be only invoked once in the first sentence; do this after the second genre it sources
done
  • "shows more pop influences than the band's debut album." → "showcases more pop influences than Women." with the pipe
done
  • "The album opens with" → "It begins with" also, remove the comma from inside the song title speech marks
Done
Done
Done
  • "is noted for its minimal use" → "was noted for a minimal use" plus mention the feedback in this sentence and change 60s to 1960s
Done
You missed the initial point and the extra parts --K. Peake 08:59, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
W h o o p s. Done
Done
  • "to the album's tenth track" → "to Public Strain's tenth track"
Done
  • The first quote about "Venice Lockjaw" is not sourced
Done
  • "to woo the stars."" → "to woo the stars"." per MOS:QUOTE
Done
  • Remove the comma from inside "Bells", also the integral description is unsourced
Somehow I switched the refs up, fixed
  • "style drive a listener" → "style drive listeners" but the quote is not sourced and move the punctuation outside speech marks
Ref added, fixed
  • "is considered to be" → "has been considered to be"
Done
  • "noisiest tracks on the album," → "noisiest tracks on Public Strain," but where is the noisiest part sourced?
Done, source added
  • The "brilliant climax" part is not sourced, also this is not neutral for music and lyrics
Just removed that part
  • [16][17] should solely be at the end of the sentence
Done
  • "wide melodic intervals."" → "wide melodic intervals"."
Done
  • "only single off of the album;" → "only single from Public Strain;"
Done
  • "their swan song."" → "their swan song"."
Done
  • ""Eyesore" is one of" → "The track is one of"
Done
  • "The album is noted for its evocative," → "Public Strain is noted for evocative,"
Done
  • "between Patrick and Matthew Flegel," → "between Patrick and Matt Flegel,"
Done
  • "The album cover was" → "The cover art was" to be less repetitive
Done
  • "of the town where Johnson lived in," → "of the town where Johnson lived,"
Done
  • "was also referenced on" → "was previously referenced on"
Done

Release

  • The releases are not sourced, also can you find an exact date like you've wrote in the beginning of the article?
Done...hopefully
This should work, I suppose. --K. Peake 08:59, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
done
  • "3-month fall tour" → "three-month fall tour" per
    MOS:NUM
done
  • "and the band's label Flemish Eye stated that the band" → "and Flemish Eye stated that Women"
done
  • "in the same year after" → "in October 2010 after"
done
  • Why no mention of the "Eyesore" single release here?
Brief mention added, but there is a surprising lack of information

Reception

Done
Done
  • "with reviewer Electric City writing that "[i]n the" → "writing: "In the"
Done
  • Fix MOS:QUOTE issues throughout this section for the parts that aren't full sentences
  • "Chris Buckle, writing for" → "Chris Buckle, for"
Done
  • "writing for PopMatters, commented that in the wake of the bands" → "at PopMatters, commented that in the wake of the band's"
Done
  • "writing for No Ripcord," → "for No Ripcord" and remove the independent introduction here, also doesn't this contradict the widespread acclaim statement at the start? If so, I would suggest altering that part.
Done. I'm not sure since while some reviewers were more qualified, this is the sole negative review I could find (also see the Metacritic and ADM refs)
  • The Velvet Underground → the Velvet Underground per
    MOS:THEMUSIC
Done
  • "placed it at" → "placed the album at"
Done
  • "of the BBC called it" → "of BBC called Public Strain" with the wikilink
Done

Legacy and influence

  • "The album is widely considered" → "It is widely considered"
Done
  • "Sputnikmusic's staff ranked it the 3rd" → "Sputnikmusic's staff ranked Public Strain the third" per MOS:NUM
Done
  • Fix MOS:QUOTE issues throughout this section for the parts that aren't full sentences
Done...again, hopefully
  • "ranked it the" → "ranked the album the"
done
  • "of the decade respectively." → "of the decade, respectively."
done
  • "called the album a" → "called Public Strain a"
Done
Done
  • Remove wikilink on the Velvet Underground
Done
  • Remove or replace Medium per
    WP:MEDIUM
Removed
  • "named it one" → "named Public Strain one"
Done
  • Remove wikilink on Flemish Eye
Done
  • "that had released the album" → "that had released Public Strain"
Done

Track listing

  • See
    MOS:TABLECAPTION
Done

Personnel

Done

References

  • Copyvio score looks too high at 51.6%; cut down the quoting in legacy and influence to fix this
Done...but will double check after I post this
It is around 41% now, which means you still need to cut down quoting but good job in dropping by around 10%! --K. Peake 09:00, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Cut this down
Just removing, as it only sources a little bit on the recording section
  • Cite Tumblr as publisher instead on ref 5 with the wikilink
Done
  • Cite last name before first on ref 6 and wikilink Apple Podcasts, citing in via parameter instead
Done
  • Remove or replace ref 8 per WP:MEDIUM
Just removed
  • Cite Bandcamp as publisher instead on ref 10
Done
Done
  • Cite Revolution Rock as publisher instead on ref 13
Done
  • WP:OVERLINK
    of PopMatters on ref 17
Removed
  • Cite Sputnikmusic as publisher instead on refs 18 and 35, wikilinking on the first instance
Done
Done
  • Fix
    MOS:QWQ
    issues with refs 20 and 21
Using single quotes now
  • Cite Flemish Eye Records as publisher instead on ref 22 and pipe to Flemish Eye
done
  • www.earshot-online.com → !earshot on ref 23, piping to Exclaim!
Done
  • Remove or replace ref 24 per
    WP:SELFPUB
Replaced
  • Remove wikilink on Exclaim! for ref 31
Done
  • Cite Pitchfork as work/website instead on ref 32
Done
  • Remove BBC from the title of ref 33 and change www.bbc.co.uk to BBC, citing as publisher instead with the wikilink
Done
  • Aux.tv → A.Side TV on ref 34, citing as publisher instead with the wikilink
Done
Done
Done
  • exclaim.ca → Exclaim! on ref 38
Done
  • FLOOD → Flood on ref 39
Done

External links

  • Good

Final comments and verdict

  •  On hold until all of the issues are fixed; quite a lengthy review this one! --K. Peake 14:38, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm gonna save here--feel free to look through my changes, and I'll finish this up in a bit DecrepitlyOnward (he/they/she) (talk) 18:23, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@K. Peake: I've responded to everything above. I think this only needs a tad more work but we'll see. If you need me to clarify something further, I am happy to! DecrepitlyOnward (he/they/she) (talk) 23:50, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
DecrepitlyOnward It is applaudable that you responded so quickly and I have done some copy editing myself in minor areas, but there are still some unresolved issues that I pointed out above. --K. Peake 08:59, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@K. Peake:, I really should've double checked and brought all of the advice from my last GAN to here. But here we are. Addressed everything above. DecrepitlyOnward (he/they/she) (talk) 01:39, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • ✓ Pass time, no problems are remaining now! --K. Peake 08:19, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Public_Strain/GA1&oldid=1069237986"