Wikipedia:Peer review/Young Americans/archive1

Young Americans

I've listed this article for peer review because... I'm considering taking it to FAC but would like some input as I know it's not there yet. Pinging Ceoil who requested it.

Thanks, – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 14:59, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Zmbro. Great work on one of my top 5 favourite albums. Reading through and comments soon. Ceoil (talk) 00:15, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Hey there. Just so you know the article needs a LOT of work before it can be brought to FAC. The reception sections need to be completely reworked and I need to summarize more in music and lyrics. It's certainly doable – I made great progress the other day – but just know the revision you look over now will be very different from when we're over. Best. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 17:35, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

I get that - do you want me hold off comments until you are ready? Either way, looking forward. Ceoil (talk) 22:36, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Ceoil Sorry for the late reply; been dealing with issues over at Aladdin Sane. If you had some tips on where I could take things or possible sources to use I'd appreciate it but let's leave strictly prose comments for later when it's more finalized :-) Thanks. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 15:15, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Ceoil Moisejp Hey all. it should be all set for comments now. I bought a new book that will arrive tomorrow in hopes of getting some more useful info but other than that it should be all set. :-) – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 21:12, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Ceoil No rush, I just wanted to get a status update after a few weeks. Thanks. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 22:37, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

I can try to have a look at this but will probably be more useful when the prose is more finalized, if that's cool. I'll probably be able to make more suggestions about the prose than the content or sources. If you want to ping me then, please do, and (although I can't absolutely promise) I expect I'll likely have time at that time. Cheers, Moisejp (talk) 05:59, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Zmbro, sorry I have been tardy to look at this. I hoped I'd have time this weekend but it looks like it didn't happen. Next weekend is a long weekend, and I have fewer overall commitments, so I'm optimistic I should be able to get started on it then. Thanks for your patience. :-) Moisejp (talk) 02:01, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

• Update: I'm about a third the way through my first reading. So far it is reading well and I haven't noticed any big issues. I'll try to finish my first read-through in the coming days. :-) Moisejp (talk) 07:11, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Comments:

• (Songs section) "and music white soul": Is this a typo? Moisejp (talk) 03:56, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
• "Biographer Marc Spitz said the album does not showcase "Bowie does black music", but rather "Bowie and black music do each other"." Doesn't seem very clear what this means. Without more context, consider taking it out? Moisejp (talk) 03:58, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
• More context for these two sentences would be good if possible. They also seem somewhat contradictory without any attempt at bridging the gulf between them. "Lyrical themes throughout the album include loneliness, despair and alienation.[37] Biographer Christopher Sandford writes that the album is "a record of high spirits and lively, colliding ideas"." Moisejp (talk) 04:00, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
• Can this be expanded on? It suggests Lennon didn't strictly speaking do any of the songwriting on "Fame". If there are any more supporting details available, they'd be welcome. "Bowie later said that Lennon was the "energy" and the "inspiration" for "Fame", which is why he received a writing credit." Moisejp (talk) 04:12, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
• Getting back to this, apologies for the long delay. Minor point that I'm sure wouldn't go long without being noticed and fixed up, but it's mentioned twice that he was one of the first white artists to appear on Soul Train. Moisejp (talk) 06:37, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
• Critical reception section: I see you use Rock's Backpages and worldradiohistory.com (I'm not familiar with this last one, may check it out sometime) to access some old sources, and I see one instance of Newspapers.com. Is there not more available newspaper reviewing of the album in Newspapers.com? I don't know if there's more for the 1980s than the 70s, but when I was working on "I'm Goin' Down" I really found Newspapers.com to be a revelation, there were so many reviews with so many tidbits that I was able to patch together to flesh out various sections of the article. I haven't looked but if it happens there is more available in there it could be beneficial. (If there's not, then maybe it's just because Born in the U.S.A. was culturally a huger album than Young Americans, so my expectations for the number of reviews are out of whack?) Currently I find the details given for the "favorable" paragraph to be a little weak, and what does "phenomenologically precise" mean--is it praise? :D (Presumably it is, but how many people will know what the word means or what the context is supposed to be.) Maybe merge "most compelling album to date" and "best studio record since Ziggy Stardust" into a single point?
• Critical reception: It's a start that you have it divided into positive, mixed, and negative, but I feel quite a bit more work could be done to find ways to find common themes in the reviews, and paraphrase more of the direct quotes. Moisejp (talk) 07:05, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

OK, I've finished my first read-through. I hope my review doesn't come across as too harsh, but I do feel this article needs a fair amount of work still to reach FA level.

• Subsequent events: The first paragraph reads relatively well, but the second para seems kind of choppy: "A said this. B said that. C said such-and-such." Thematically there is a decent flow of ideas, but the sentences don't flow well one into the next as prose. Possibly vary sentence structure more and combine sentences to highlight the intended thematic flow of ideas.
• Influence: This section felt one of the weakest to me.

• "With the album, Bowie was one of the first mainstream white artists to embrace black musical styles,[27] paving the way for other artists to engage in similar styles." says that Bowie was influential but the next sentence does not ("Daryl Easlea summarised in Record Collector: "While all rock'n'roll was based on white men's appropriation of black popular music, very few artists had embraced the form wholesale, to the point of using the same studios and musicians, as Bowie [did].")—it just says he was one of the first. So it does support the "one of the first mainstream white artists to embrace black musical styles" part of the previous sentence, but the reader is left to wonder whether Easlea was also supporting the part about it being influential. Likely this can be easily solved by just expanding the context of what Easlea said a bit.
• "In subsequent years, artists who experimented with funk and soul after Bowie included Elton John, Roxy Music, Rod Stewart, the Rolling Stones, Bee Gees, Talking Heads, Spandau Ballet, Japan and ABC." This feels like a long list, with the implication that they were all at least indirectly influenced by Bowie taking the lead with these genres, but it'd be nice to have a bit more solid evidence. Mentioning just a few artists with solid info on how they showed their influence, or how they were influenced, would be stronger than a long list like this.
• "Bowie was also referenced directly by George Clinton in the Parliament song "P. Funk (Wants to Get Funked Up)" (1976) and in the film Saturday Night Fever (1977)." Does "referenced by" mean his name was just mentioned as being a funky/soulful guy, or what does it mean? Again, more solid evidence of how these truly showed being influenced by Bowie would be helpful.
• The rest of this paragraph seems fine.

• The Retrospective reviews section also feels choppy. There is a medium good amount of thematic cohesion across the section, so that's a good start, but I'd suggest paraphrasing more quotes, and merging more sentences together.
• "even being considered by some as a masterpiece of "white soul" ": Do you need the quotes around "white soul"? It seems the phrase has already been used a few times in the article.
• Outtakes: "Biographers have generally praised the track as one of the most overlooked gems of Bowie's entire career": "Generally" feels like a big statement. Of all the critics out there, have so many said so? Maybe soften this statement down a bit.

OK, that's my first read-through. I did notice other little things here and there that I wasn't immediately sure how to address. Maybe I'll catch those in my second read-through. I'm actually going to be away for a few weeks, so I won't be able to come back to this immediately. But I think if you can address my comments above it will go a long way towards improving the article. If you happen to have started the FAC before I get back, I'll jump back in there, or if this PR is still going on, I'll jump back in here. Cheers and happy holidays! Moisejp (talk) 06:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@Zmbro: There are comments above. Are you still planning on working on this article, or can this PR be closed? Z1720 (talk) 15:47, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Sorry about that I have been preoccupied with other projects. I'm anticipating opening a PR for Born to Run in the coming days so I think I will go ahead and close this for now. I can open another PR for this one in the future if I feel like it. Thanks. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:09, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Template:FAC peer review sidebar

STANDARD NOTE: I have added this PR to the Template:FAC peer review sidebar to get quicker and more responses. When this PR is closed, please remove it from the list. Also, consider adding the sidebar to your userpage to help others discover pre-FAC PRs, and please review other articles in that template. Thanks, Z1720 (talk) 02:51, 21 October 2023 (UTC)