Talk:Wake Up Call (Theory of a Deadman album)/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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.

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

Reviewer: Homeostasis07 (talk) 16:48, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'll be reviewing this article over the next while. Homeostasis07 (talk) 16:48, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I look forward to working with you. — Miss Sarita 03:23, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Overall, this looks like a pretty solid article, and I see only a couple of issues which need addressing prior to promotion. Should be a pretty quick process. ;) Homeostasis07 (talk) 20:36, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

The only problem I see here is with the line: "The album has been described as having a more pop-focused sound than previous releases, which was the result of lead singer Tyler Connolly feeling creatively constrained and also learning how to play the piano." I have a feeling someone will eventually come along and add a ^{[by whom?]} tag next to the word "described", so probably better to rephrase at this stage. The latter part of the sentence also feels a bit disjointed. Maybe this could be rephrased to something along the lines of "The band described the album as having a more pop-focused sound than previous releases, which was the result of lead singer Tyler Connolly composing the majority of the album's music on piano, saying that he began to feel creatively constrained on guitar."

Interesting. I read over the article before reading your review (it's been a while since I've looked at it), and I thought the exact same thing about this particular sentence. Technically, the band itself has never explicitly described the genre of this album; the "pop" and "pop rock" descriptions, from what I have found, have been given to Wake Up Call by critics and reviewers. So, I have revised this sentence to, "Critics have described the album as having a more pop-infused sound than previous releases, which was the result of lead singer Tyler Connolly composing the majority of the record's music on the piano instead of the usual guitar." — Miss Sarita 23:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Wake Up Call peaked at numbers thirteen and number twenty-four on the Billboard Canadian Albums and US Billboard 200 charts, respectively. First "numbers" is plural, so you can lose the second "number".

The second "number" has been removed. — Miss Sarita 23:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Background and development

Careful of the tense usage: "Theory of a Deadman's sound has been firmly rooted in the alternative and hard rock genres since the band signed... Change has→had. I'm happy with everything else in this section.

Done. — Miss Sarita 23:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Musical style and composition

Similar issue here as in the lead: "Wake Up Call has been seen as a departure from Theory of a Deadman's usual hard rock foundation, moving into pop and pop rock territory." Might be better off changing to "Wake Up Call was described by both the band and numerous publications as a departure from their previous hard rock work, moving into pop and pop rock territory."

I have revised this sentence to, "Wake Up Call has been described by critics as a departure from Theory of a Deadman's usual hard rock foundation, moving into pop and pop rock territory." Please let me know if this will work. — Miss Sarita 23:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Recording

First paragraph needs sources. I see a lot of the information there can be cited to the Surrey Now reference, but was reluctant to do this myself because I couldn't see anything about A&R in that source.

Both refs at the end of the second paragraph sourced all of the information in the entire "Recording" section, but I agree that that fact is not very apparent. So, I've simply duplicated the refs at the end of both paragraphs. — Miss Sarita 23:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion and singles

"It's looking like it's the biggest song of our career right now," Back said. seems to come out of nowhere and doesn't really add much. Could you find a way of messaging this into the paragraph a bit better?

Fully agreed. I broke the paragraph about "Rx (Medicate)" into two separate paragraphs, and tried to work this particular sentence in a little better. Please let me know if this works. If not, I am happy to revise (or to remove it entirely if my brain continues to fail to see a better way to alter it). — Miss Sarita 23:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"In January 2018, Theory of a Deadman released the second single from the album, "Straight Jacket", which was accompanied by a music video on their official YouTube account. Featuring staccato piano notes performed by Connolly," These comments currently appear to be unsourced. I've no problem if you use a primary source (i.e., the actual YouTube link) to source a simple statement like "accompanied by a music video on their official YouTube account" – since it's hardly a controversial statement – but a secondary source would be preferable. Also might need a source for the bracketed text "(which stands for "Pacific Coast Highway", the name designated to a particular section of the California State Route 1 in southern California)" I didn't spot anything confirming that in the music video.

I added a source for the month that "Straight Jacket" was released as a single. I was unable to find a reliable third-party source regarding the music video being released in February 2018, so I linked to the band's official YouTube account. Hope this is okay. — Miss Sarita 23:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"PCH" standing for "Pacific Coast Highway" is just common knowledge to those who are familiar with southern California (where I lived for many years, and where the lead singer of the band currently resides), so I forget that this type of information needs to be sourced...because we Californians tend to think the world revolves around us. :-D Would a tweet from the band's official Twitter account be okay? A brief Google search did not turn up any reliable third-party sources... If not, I can remove this bit of information, although I feel like it would answer questions as to what "PCH" actually means to fans who are searching for the information. — Miss Sarita 23:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception and awards and all subsequent sections

Couldn't see anything that needed altering in any of these sections. Properly formatted, quotes kept brief, couldn't find any other high-profile reviews worth including or any international charts. Happy with source quality and formatting. Earwig's CopyVio tool came back with 1 yellow flag (a Billboard interview), but that's the result of a single direct quotation, which I don't see as a problem. So I'd be happy promoting this once my minor quibbles above are sorted. ;) Homeostasis07 (talk) 20:36, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the thorough review. Please let me know if these fixes will suffice. I'm happy to continue editing if you have any other suggestions/requirements. — Miss Sarita 23:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the swift response, @Miss Sarita: I'm more than satisfied with the changes you've made, so I'm happy to promote this now. ;) Congratulations on yet another GA! (Please keep in mind that the bot may take a while to add the GA symbol to the top of the article—it can take up to 6 hours to appear). Homeostasis07 (talk) 02:12, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Homeostasis07: Thank you so much! I've been waiting a long time for this and I greatly appreciate you taking the time to look everything over and making this a seamless process. If you need anything reviewed/looked at, please feel free to hit me up. I'd love to return the favor one day! :-) — Miss Sarita 15:12, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

The discussion above 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.