Talk:This Side of the Moon/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 16:23, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

I will review this soon, haven't done one of your articles for a while! --K. Peake 16:23, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for picking this up for a review. I hope you are having a good week so far. Aoba47 (talk) 20:29, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

Remove venue parameter as that is for live recordings

Removed. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

the Sound Emporium → The Sound Emporium in the infobox

Removed. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Remove exec from brackets per Template:Infobox album

Removed. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"in August 2004 through the Hog Country Production record label, and" → "in August 2004, through Hog Country Production, and"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Cook recorded This Side of the Moon after leaving" → "Cook started recording after she left"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"second studio album Hey Y'all in 2002." → "second studio album, Hey Y'all (2002)."

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"With her follow-up album, she discussed her" → "For the album's successor, she was inspired by her"

Revised slightly. I kept follow-up album as "the album's successor" sounds weird to me. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"on love and heartbreak." → "that discuss love and heartbreak."

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"were written and recorded independently," the highlighted part does not appear to be true after reading the body that talks about co-writers

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"in eight Tennessee recording studios, before being grouped" → "at eight Tennessee recording studios, before they were grouped"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"to other country artists," → "on the album to the vocals of other country artists,"

Revised with something different. I do not think "on the album" is necessary as a reader can already know this from context, and I avoid repeating "vocals" twice in the same sentence. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"promoted the album with" → "promoted This Side of the Moon with"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"generally positive from critics," → "generally positive from music critics," with the target

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Despite this critical acclaim, This Side of the Moon did" → "Despite gathering critical acclaim, it did"

Revised slightly. I think "gathering" sounds weird in this context so I used "receiving" instead. Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I changed this part completely to avoid any misleading implication that reviews are in any way connected to the lack of airplay. Aoba47 (talk) 23:07, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Background and recording

"which were later grouped together on" → "that were later grouped together for" on the img main text

Revised. Aoba47 (talk)

"Elizabeth Cook signed a" → "Cook signed a"

This is the first time Cook is mentioned in the article so her full name and the link need to be used. Aoba47 (talk) 18:21, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

She is a main subject of the article due to being the album's lead artist, so does not need a mention by full name outside of the lead --K. Peake 07:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are incorrect. For album articles, the primary artist does need to be fully named and linked on their first mention in the body of the article. The lead and the body of the article are treated separately and items are linked in both (including the primary artist). I am not sure where you got your impression from, but it is not correct. Aoba47 (talk) 19:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"her self-released" → "her self-released 2000" with the target

Revised. Aoba47 (talk)

Add release year of Hey Y'all in brackets

Revised slightly. I added the release it was released later in the sentence Aoba47 (talk)

"they transferred Cook's contract to the parent company" → "the company transferred Cook's contract to its parent company,"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk)

Wikilink Warner Bros.

It is already linked. Aoba47 (talk) 18:21, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not properly though; it is supposed to be wikilinked ending on the full-stop --K. Peake 07:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"for other options" → "for a different record label"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"following her Warner Bros. deal." → "after her deal with Warner Bros. ended."

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Five producers including" → "Five producers, including"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"director Steve Fishell handled" → "director Steve Fishell, handled"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"recorded in eight" → "recorded at eight"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Jeff Gordon is the album's" → "Jeff Gordon served as This Side of the Moon's"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"with producing most of This Side of the Moon," → "with producing most of the album,"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"departure from Warner Bros." → "departure from Warner Bros.,"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

""period of..." where is this quote backed up?

It is on the second page of the citation. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"and joked it was" → "and Cook joked it was"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Target mainstream radio to Contemporary hit radio

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"said this changed" → "said this responsibility changed"

Used "feeling" instead as it was more about Cook's emotions than an actual responsibility. That and I did not want to repeat responsibility twice in such a close proximity. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"which she said allowed her" → "saying that the album allowed her"

Revised slightly. I used "it" instead of "the album" to avoid repeating "album" twice in the same sentence. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"on the album's thirteen" → "on all of This Side of the Moon's thirteen"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"with songwriter Hardie McGehee[8]" → "with songwriter Hardie McGehee,[8]"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"had collaborated on" → "had previously collaborated on"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"two songs ("Ruthless" and "Heather Are You With Me Tonight") by" → "the two songs "Ruthless" and "Heather Are You With Me Tonight" by"

Revised, although I used commas to separate the song titles from the rest of the sentence. Aoba47 (talk) 18:30, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Composition and lyrics

The sub-sections are useless, since it is titled Composition and lyrics but keep the paras as they currently are

I disagree. I found the subsections helpful and would prefer to keep them. I used a similar structure for Hey Y'all and I've seen other articles use this. I prefer to give this section some sense of structure rather than having it be a wall of text. Aoba47 (talk) 18:31, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Elizabeth Cook's voice to that of" → "Cook's voice to the one of"

I think "the one of" sounds awkward. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Remove wikilink on Country Standard Time

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"described its style" → "described its style as"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"said the songs had" → "said the songs have"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Target to Retro style should only be on the word retro

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"the songs had different styles, from" → "the songs have various different styles, ranging from"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Target Music journalists to Music journalism

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"vocals to those of" → "vocals on The Side of the Moon to those of"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Grant Alden described Cook as" → "Alden described Cook as"

I prefer to use the critic's full name on their fist mention in a new section even though they were already introduced in a previous section. I just think using the last name only may be unnecessarily confusing to a reader, but that is just my opinion. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For this and the other points where you have not changed the name references, isn't it pointless to re-use full names when they are the only ones with the surnames mentioned in the article; plus it is discouraged on Wiki for repeated full names refs for real names of people --K. Peake 07:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that it is pointless, but I have changed it anyway. I did the style for Hey Y'all, which passed a FAC, but it boils down to personal preference. Aoba47 (talk) 19:29, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"saying it was" → "saying her voice is"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"as moments where" → "as moments on the album where"

I do not think this is needed. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It should be for context --K. Peake 07:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 19:51, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"said Cook lacked a" → "said Cook doesn't have a"

Revised slightly. You are not supposed to use contractions on Wikipedia. Aoba47 (talk) 01:20, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"unlike other singers' approach" → "unlike other singers' approaches"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Throughout the album, the lyrics" → "Throughout This Side of the Moon, the lyrics"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"warns her partner in" → "warns Carroll on"

The source does not support this. Yes, this is a duet with Carroll, but it is another thing to say that the lyrics are specifically about him. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"about the work" → "about the hard work"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"The album's final track "Somebody's Gotta Do It" is" → "The album's final track, "Somebody's Gotta Do It", is"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilink love song

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"thoughts about his" → "thoughts of his"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"over carrying out an airstrike ("Ain't it" → "over killing from a plane, "Ain't it" and delete the brackets in this edit

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"and his hope that his girlfriend will" → "The soldiers' hope that his girlfriend will" as a new sentence

With this edit, it would not be a complete sentence. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"and be faithful ("If I’m" → "→ "and be faithful is shown with the lyrics, "If I'm" and delete the brackets

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"emphasized that it was a" → "emphasized that it is a"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Comparing the lyrics to" → "Comparing the song's lyrics to those of"

I do not think it is necessary. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It should be, so we know the lyrics are being compared on both sides --K. Peake 07:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 19:51, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Warner Bros., specifically with" → "Warner Bros., specifically on"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"to cope with her feelings of" → "to handle her feelings of"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[4] does not back up that sentence?

It is on the second page of the citation. Aoba47 (talk) 18:42, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Release and promotion

"described it as an independent release." → "described the release as independent."

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"available nationally on May 17, 2005" → "available on May 17, 2005" since no sources state what countries the release was in or call it national

I moved a citation here to support the "national" part, but since it does not explicitly specify the country (though it is most likely the US), I put that the record label gave the album a larger release. Aoba47 (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[25] should be removed since it is not needed

Removed. Aoba47 (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Prior to the album's release," → "Prior to release,"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"She also promoted" → "Cook also promoted"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"at international" → "by performing at international"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Remove the streaming sentence since that is not backed up

That is not correct. The citation shows it is available on Spotify and Amazon Music. Aoba47 (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"to its YouTube account" → "to its YouTube channel"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"when it changed" → "when the company changed"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"to it and felt comfortable" → "to it, and felt comfortable"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"perform in shows." → "perform at live shows."

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"who were frustrated" → "that she thought were frustrated"

Good catch with this as it is important to not present this in Wikipedia's voice and emphasize that this is Cook's opinion and not from the fans themselves (or anyone else in general). Aoba47 (talk) 18:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception

Change the img main text to mentioning what specifically was praised about Cook/her vocie

I decided to remove the image altogether as it is not the best quality, and I was uncertain about mentioning specific trends in reviews per WP:SYNTH. Aoba47 (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"received positive reviews from critics." → "was met with generally positive reviews from music critics."

I think that suggestion is unnecessarily wordy. Aoba47 (talk) 01:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"met with" is better grammar for the body, plus you still need to mention "generally positive" since that is the truth --K. Peake 07:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Kelefa Sanneh described the album as" → "Sanneh described it as"
"Stephen Thompson felt the album was" → "Thompson felt the album was"
"Nick Cristiano thought" → "Cristiano thought"
"Rick Bell commended Cook for" → "Bell commended Cook's performance on the album for"
"Grant Alden praised the album's cohesion as well as" → "Alden praised the album's cohesion, as well as"
"dismissing the notion Cook" → "dismissing the notion that Cook"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Peter Cooper singled out" → "Cooper singled out"
"her fifth studio album Welder," → "her fifth studio album Welder from the same year,"

Revised slightly. I moved the release date after the album title instead of using "from the same year". After reading your note, I agree that it is important to specify the year, because it is not made clear from the year the review was published because there are plenty of reviews published years after an album was released. Aoba47 (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Alice Randall and Carter and" → "Randall, and Carter and"

Thank you for pointing this out. I just have a preference for using the critics' full names when I first re-introduce them in a new section. It is probably dumb, but I just find it more helpful for a reader. Aoba47 (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"while praising Cook for" → "when praising Cook for"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Retrospective reviews" → "Retrospective reviews of This Side of the Moon"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"a critic for" → "a contributor for"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"a NPR writer said" → "an NPR writer said"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"identified it as an" → "identified the album as an"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"for River Cities' Reader attributed" → "for the River Cities' Reader attributed"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"helped to establish Cook" → "to helping establish Cook"

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Track listing

See MOS:TABLECAPTION

Apologies in advance, but can you specify what you mean by this? Thank you. Aoba47 (talk) 18:59, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You need to have a headline for the track listing; see recently-passed GA Doll Domination – The Mini Collection for example --K. Peake 07:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see a reason to include the headline since it would just be repeating the same information and citation already provided in the sentence about the track listing. I have never used the headline, and I have had articles like All Money Is Legal get promoted to a FA. It's just two different ways of doing it. Aoba47 (talk) 19:35, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is literally required because of the MOS rule; however, this was not set for music articles back when that article passed for FA so I understand your confusion and have made this fix for you. --K. Peake 19:58, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comma should not be used for separation

I am not sure how that slipped in there. I guess I was feeling lazy for that one part lol. Aoba47 (talk) 18:58, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Credits and personnel

Retitle to Personnel

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 19:00, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

were adapted from the booklet → are adapted from the booklet

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 19:00, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Target Wanda Vick to Wild Rose (band)

Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 19:00, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

Footnotes

Copyvio score is relatively high at 45.1%, but this is fine since it is the personnel

Citations

Make sure all of these are archived by using the tool

I believe that a majority of the citations are already archived, but thank you for the remainder. Aoba47 (talk) 19:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Even these do not have numbers next to them, I will identify them by citation numbers in the order that they are in below
WP:OVERLINK of No Depression on citation 2
WP:OVERLINK of Country Standard Time on citation 5
WP:OVERLINK of The Tennessean on citations 7, 8, 9, 25 and 26
Wikilink Newspapers.com on citation 7 per MOS:LINK2SECT

Apologies in advance, but could you clarify what you mean by this? Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 19:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You should wikilink it because redirects to sections are supposed to be wikilinked rather than targeted --K. Peake 07:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see any reason why it cannot be targeted to a section (and it is done this way for all of the Newspapers.com links. Not just for this one). Aoba47 (talk) 19:39, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is because of the MOS rule and I stated just for citation 7 back when I thought the wikilinks for the others would be removed; fixed for you now. --K. Peake 19:58, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OVERLINK of Newspapers.com on citations 8, 9, 10, 25, 26 and 31
WP:OVERLINK of AllMusic on citations 17 and 22
WP:OVERLINK of CMT on citation 27
WP:OVERLINK of Elizabeth Cook on citation 28
WP:OVERLINK of Billboard on citation 32

I prefer to link the website/publisher for each individual citation because I treat them individually. I have seen two different approaches to this. I have seen editors that only link the first instance, and others that link for every instance like myself. It just boils down to personal preference. Aoba47 (talk) 19:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Final comments and verdict

On hold until the issues are fixed, though sorry about the confusion with citation layout --K. Peake 16:26, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kyle Peake: Thank you for picking this up for a review. I honestly did not expect it to be reviewed so quickly as this album (and artist) are rather obscure. I believe that I have addressed all of your comments. I have two quick clarification questions, and apologies again for not understanding them as I am sure they are already clear. I hope that I do not come across as rude in any of my response as I genuinely appreciate your help. I hope you are having a good week, and let me know if you need any help with your Wikipedia projects. Aoba47 (talk) 19:07, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47 I have replied to you where I have more queries, and it is fine that you have questioned me since I have easily replied. --K. Peake 07:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kyle Peake: I have responded to your points above. I have changed the part about the critics' names because it is not a major point to me, but I still disagree with a few of your comments. As I have already stated above, Cook does need to be fully mentioned and linked on the first mention in the body of the article, and your statement about that is just not true. Aoba47 (talk) 19:40, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: Thank you for being fully professional in your response; I understand your reasoning for not implementing some changes and will keep them unchanged. ✓ Pass for this article now though, after some brief copy editing by me and you are a pleasure to work with! --K. Peake 19:58, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your professionalism as well. It is always a pleasure to work with you, and you have helped to improve the article immensely. Have a great rest of your day! Aoba47 (talk) 19:59, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]