Jump to content

Talk:Until the End (Kittie album)/GA2

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

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Nominator: Chchcheckit (talk · contribs) 17:29, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: MFTP Dan (talk · contribs) 22:53, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Screw it, if I'm ever going to get my Wikipedia mojo back, I'm going to start by reviewing someone else's content. I will start this tonight, with the goal of getting this passed before it hits 20 on Friday if you're quick. mftp dan oops 22:53, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for doing this i really appreciate it!!!!!!!!!!! :)))))))))) Don't rush yrself at the risk of factchecking ig but anyway three quick things: 1. the proquest and newspapers.com links are all accessible via wikipedia library and 2. the origins/evolutions doc; you can find it yrself it's out there if you know what im saying, i legally bought it on youtube. 3. pls be ultra stingy with spotchecking/citations like the last ga reviewer. Chchcheckit (talk) 23:17, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Initial checklist assessment

[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    A few minor prose things for the initial checklist, but very doable.

Lead

[edit]
  • Gonna do this one last because it's related to the content in the body and I don't want anything to be changed that doesn't correspond below. But I'll keep it here so when you get to working on the article you can just fix it in reading order.

Background

[edit]
  • I think a better choice of reference placement for referencing Oracle would be the end of the sentence.
  • Where was the band performing on March 29, 2002?
  • "Vocalist/guitarist Morgan Lander" reads informally, can we go with one of "frontwoman" or "vocalist and guitarist"? I'd recommend the former.
  • Is the quote from Morgan to end the section necessary? I feel like this is simple enough to be demonstrated in original prose.
  • All source choices appropriately reliable.
  • Between the dates, the Kiss of Infamy Tour should say "to", not "and".

I have an appointment, be back soon. mftp dan oops 22:09, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recording and production

[edit]
  • "Long View" is fine for the second time the studio is mentioned. "Facilities" is also unnecessary, "isolated nature" implies that.
  • Regarding Mercedes' drums, "span" is a more appropriate term than "space" when referring to length of time.
  • Blabbermouth is something I only rely on if it's the best option available for a source; I think Borowsky is sufficient to cite the click tracks.
  • The organization of how Marx is introduced to the fold is not my first choice, but it is not critically important and is acceptable as it is. If you're interested, we can address this later.
    • I would have approached the timeline differently; the things which follow where you first mention her being recruited feel like things that should lead up to her recruitment. Are you comfortable with re-writing this accordingly? Any further than good article status would probably prefer it this way.
  • Reliability passes.

This is where I will pick up in a few hours. Gotta bounce again! mftp dan oops 23:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • background is fixed per what you said
  • "facilities" and "isolated nature" are together because Kittie didn't leave Long View Farm for the most part/whatsoever. what i mean is, the studio setting was self-sufficient, which is what the "focus solely on recording" thing intends. if that makes sense
    Yes, I guess it’s a matter of specifics. Let me see what I can do Chchcheckit (talk) 02:11, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    From Garagno 2004, p. 44: Mercedes states: "We left the studio, tops, three or four times in the three weeks we were there". Chchcheckit (talk) 02:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Interesting. I might suggest adding to the end of the sentence, according to Mercedes, the band left the studio three or four times at most during the recording process. with the appropriate reference. mftp dan oops 03:43, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Chchcheckit (talk) 23:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Composition and lyrics

[edit]
  • Since when does Songfacts produce original material? I thought all they did was post user-generated information, but the author here is familiar. Prato used to write for Allmusic and Billboard, he's got the cred.
  • The Metal Storm ref also catches me by surprise. I understand that it's listed as reliable on WP:A/S, but traditionally, it wasn't. I won't hold it over you, but I recommend removing it as you have two better sources supporting the same information here.
  • This section is the best written out of all I've read so far.

Reception

[edit]
  • I like how you organized this, and wish more albums wrote like this instead of having a tiny level 1 subheading for commercial performance.
    • Commercial is fine as is, I can't think of anything to improve it at the moment.
  • Critical reception is almost there: you should probably group commentary into common sentiment for, against, or mixed on the album. Take a look at WP:RECEPTION.
  • Optional but recommended change: maybe shorten or altogether paraphrase the Village Voice quote?

Also, just a side comment...sorry to you and Rick Skidmore, but Machine Head blows these girls out of the water eight days a week.

Touring and aftermath

[edit]
  • Re-order Mercedes' medical emergency in Cleveland so that it precedes the tour cancellation.
  • Was the Circo Volado just another concert on the tour or was it a festival? What made this one special enough to let it stand out from the others?
  • You are missing an apostrophe after Artemis Records when discussing the two departing members.
  • Kittie amicably parted ways with Artemis after the band rejected a proposed amendment to the band's contract with the label, which would have reduced the recording budget of their fourth album. Is that in the source? The way you've written it, that sounds anything but amicable; I'd be pissed.

Others

[edit]
  • Is Lisa actually credited in the liners? How? If so, I'm surprised; if not, best to remove from the credits section.

Alright, that's all I've got (save for the lead and one point I added to background which I missed). Source spotchecks have not been done beyond a select few; I will compare those (and the previous review for outstanding comments) tomorrow. Have a good night, mftp dan oops 03:43, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ty. some note from me from editing:
  • if this is anything to go by, songfacts has been doing interviews since 2003
  • also looked at WPAS, and yes, staff reviews on Metal Storm before 2009 are banned. lemme fix this. bc of this the line about "became a proper heavy metal band" has been altered because weight is shifted.
  • the reception section is organized/grouped by commonly talked points. to address the quality of the material (maturity is a common point, or at least how far from "basic" or "generic" it is) in the first paragraph, and the improvements (progression) in the second. listing it as "good/mid/bad" gets stale real fast and makes it hard to actually provide an evaluation of what sources are saying. ig see the "The Left Hand of Darkness" thing on wp reception to see what i mean.
  • mercedes medical thing tweaked
  • yes, Lisa Marx is credited as "live guitar" in liner notes
  • "Lisa Marx Quits Kittie" source states that they last talked after performing in mexico. hence why it was mentioned.
  • "Kittie amicably parted ways with Artemis"; that was a last minute addition. "amicably" removed because the blasting-zone interview shows hindsight is 20/20
side note haha: im p. sure ruskell 04 isn't putting them above or below machine head; it's about derirativeness. also, ofc this album isn't through the ashes of empires or the more things change etc but it never will be. i sorta appreciate albums for what they are now and don't expect them to be how i want them to. in the end, what matters is what it means to you and what you get out of it, not because some rym board gave it a 3.78 or something compared to a 2.85.
I enjoy how simplistic yet heavy Kittie are, as it provides a nice contrast with a lot of the puffery i feel many metal bands often engage with (aka IM SO KVLT or THE BEST EVER). their music isn't the greatest, but at least they don't pretend it isn't; they just do what they do. that's my kind of band. :) Chchcheckit (talk) 13:08, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I have finished doing everything you highlighted. Please point out what else needs to be done, if there is anything I missed. Chchcheckit (talk) 14:01, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So here are my follow-up questions and concerns before I get to spotchecks.
  • There's a new note we've added to background with new content, providing useful context. My only complaint is why did we hide it in a note? Could you summarize what Morgan says here and shed some light on why the band chose to settle the suit?
    • Speaking of pulling information out of notes and into prose, I belatedly had that same thought about the other two notes that follow this information. The information provided by the retrospective I feel belongs in such a note. I'm relying on intuition for these two points, so I won't die on the hill, but I strongly encourage it.
  • I find it sad that because of my Metal Storm complaint that we would have to axe though others felt that there were still traces of nu metal in the band's sound. Can we re-add it and change "others" in favor of "one critic" or even naming it as Rock Hard? (I suppose I should have been more careful in my advice above, but I still believe we can do without it. The replacement you chose for it is definitely suitable.)
  • The change to Smith's perspective, saying he dismissed the album as "tenaciously mindless and effortlessly grim" is welcome, however, not exactly what I was asking for. I really liked his comparison to Melissa Auf der Maur, and find the read less interesting without it. I was thinking of something along the lines of paraphrasing him, but I actually can't make it any better without making the point unnecessarily long-winded, so I retract my original request and welcome you to return it. I will strike the original point in the review.
  • The organizational change around Mercedes' incident is more like what I was looking for. Its only problem now is that it uses too many commas. Hit the brakes after Cleveland, Ohio. Then, proceed with As a result or Consequently, the band cancelled their remaining tour dates.

Now, on to source spotchecks. mftp dan oops 00:28, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

okok. ty
  • please clarify what you mean by "The information provided by the retrospective I feel belongs in such a note." sorry i gen dnu
  • im sorry notes creep is tempting when you wanna add things but. lemme fix/reduce
  • im sad about the metalstorm too but yk wp:due. it doesn't work anymore. rock hard still makes the point about it not being removed from the nu metal sound in the critical section so it should be ok.
  • vv fixed back.
  • mercedes fixed
Chchcheckit (talk) 00:58, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spotchecks

[edit]

Background

  • I don't know if the archived version of the Hartford Courant has a typo and the new one doesn't, I don't subscribe to their service, but the dates provided for Atfield's departure differ between the two sources; one matches the date on Wikipedia, whereas Hartford says March 2? Recommend removing the specific date and just listing March 2002, and changing Arroyo to joining "soon after" or something of the like.
  • Second thoughts on BallBuster: you have two other sources citing the same information for which this source is used only once, and I find it to be of questionable repute by comparison. I find it unnecessary to include this as an extra source just to say they played Farmclub together.
  • I've created an archive URL for the Tulsa World reference, if you would please add it to the citation.
    • Same goes for the Blabbermouth reference covering Kiss of Infamy.
  • On second thought, I'm a little leery of Metal Exiles; is all information in the sentence covered by both this interview and Gloss?
    • Actually, I can't even get this one to display at all. It fails to completely load and I just get a half-baked website with a few links scattered around but no actual content.

Saving my work, on to the next one. Feel free to work on these as I go, but keep the nomination page untouched until I'm done just so we avoid edit conflicts. mftp dan oops 01:11, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recording and production

  • The basic guitar, bass and drum tracks for Until the End were done in the first week of recording; Mercedes' drums were tracked in the span of three days. Unless I'm missing something, the Blabbermouth source you have here doesn't seem to talk about this content. Please confirm I'm not crazy.
  • Until the End was recorded onto two-inch analogue tape, with minimal digital editing or overdubs. I've already checked one of the refs you have in here and confirmed it covers this information, but I would ask that you double-check your work and I'll move on.
  • Dallas Music Guide doesn't specify the show was in Seattle; does the other reference support it?


Composition and lyrics

  • No archive for the Allmusic review?
  • Off-topic: the headline used by the German source got me deceased.

...this one was surprisingly easy.

Reception

  • The Artemis Records ref for the "Into the Darkness" single serves me a headline that hooks me like a catfish chasing a nightcrawler. Why don't we have coverage of this event on the Wikipedia page?
  • Note for the future: Artemis implies Outburn and Revolver reviewed this album with this ref you use. Not necessary for inclusion to pass, but it's a thought of something to look for. (It might not be out there. Just wondering.)

Rest checks out.

Touring and aftermath

  • After checking the source, it has only now occurred to me that the Worcester show actually just coincided with the festival's path, so you could re-write it to say the tour's stop in Worcester was a stop at RoadRage '04, etc.
  • Like BallBuster, blasting-zone.com seems like a leery source which is unnecessary when you have Blabbermouth. I know what I said about them earlier in this review, but they beat a lot of publications.

That's everything I have to say about the checks. mftp dan oops 02:35, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • i think i left it out for formatting issues. if it NEEDS to be on Wikipedia i'll force myself to make an article on into the darkness but otherwise um. its 3:45am and even if i was not tired i cant make it work. i did add an extra detail though
  • worcester tweaked,
  • blasting zone remains because it informs the tone and the context. remember, hindsight is 20/20.
Chchcheckit (talk) 02:55, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
otherwise the "amicable" problem comes back and we know what we know Chchcheckit (talk) 02:55, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you rushing to do this at 3:45am? Take your time girl, get some rest, we'll finish this tomorrow. mftp dan oops 02:58, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
no. sleep is for the weak/hj and like we're almost done. Chchcheckit (talk) 02:59, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As you wish. I will detail my final concerns below and we should be good. mftp dan oops 03:00, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
do not rush Chchcheckit (talk) 03:03, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comments

[edit]
  • Regarding settling the Artemis lawsuit, are you able to paraphrase Morgan's quote?
  • I'd still insist shortening the studio name to Long View after the name of the studio is first introduced.
  • Arroyo and Mercedes recorded all of their parts for Until the End in Long View's control room, whereas Morgan was largely situated in an isolated room on the studio's second floor. She said that this reduced the amount of pressure she felt when recording, "[as] I could just sit up there with my amp and focus." How come we removed this? All I was asking was that it be removed from the note template, this is insightful information to have in the prose.
  • About the Village Voice review again...I would encourage you to restore dismissed the album as "tenaciously mindless and effortlessly grim", comparing... but also retaining the Auf der Maur quip. I don't think we're overusing it by including both. Perhaps you could say concluding that [existing quote] instead.

After that, we should be good to go. mftp dan oops 03:12, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WE ARE DONE(?)
  • paraphrased.
  • it is what it is
  • quote added
  • done
Chchcheckit (talk) 03:36, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed we are. Congratulations on your hard work! Now go get some well-earned rest. Do you mind if I take a stab at "the music video incident" now that I've passed it? mftp dan oops 03:46, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for this. it's good when someone gets to challenge and suggest things in ga reviews.
also im not going to stop you have fun Chchcheckit (talk) 03:50, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Until_the_End_(Kittie_album)/GA2&oldid=1236385107"