Talk:No Jacket Required

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Albums (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Pop music (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Rock music (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Good article No Jacket Required has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Invision references[edit]

To whomever reviews this article. While I normally would not reference posts to a forum, I feel that since Phil himself wrote the messages, they are not the usual unreliable forum messages. CarpetCrawler (talk) 01:04, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

The many lives of "The Man With The Horn"...[edit]

Phil eventually recanted his recollection that the "rat race" version of TMWTH ended up in the film "Easy Money". Here's the text of his post, he was apparently caught out by a fan:

"RAT RACE...of course you're completely right again with this....NOT easy money (though I think I was asked)....but Yes for the Miami Vice bit.."Life is a Rat Race chasing easy money" limbs are weak etc......."

This was from the "7th December 2004" entry in Messages from Phil in the official forum. MaxVolume (talk) 20:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, thank you! I must've missed that (Though to be fair, I didn't pay attention to things not relating to NJR, I was mostly looking for references!) CarpetCrawler (talk) 00:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:No Jacket Required/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
  • US not U.S. Yes check.svg Done CarpetCrawler (talk) 14:39, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
  • UK not U.K. Yes check.svg Done CarpetCrawler (talk) 14:39, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
  • It is his most pop-oriented album
It needs a source Yes check.svg Done Couldn't find a source, so I just took the statement out. Most music listeners will probably get that assumption after listening to songs from the album. ;) CarpetCrawler (talk) 15:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Don't link the dates Yes check.svg Done Looks like Wolfer68 did most of that job. Thank you! :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 15:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
  • The chart positions needs sources Yes check.svg Done
  • Unlink red pages. Yes check.svg Done Once again, looks like Wolfer68 did most of that work, thank you! :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 15:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Collins not Phil Yes check.svg Done CarpetCrawler (talk) 15:07, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

This is a great article. :) --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 07:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'm getting to work on it as we speak. CarpetCrawler (talk) 15:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
And let me just say thank you for reviewing this article so far. I thought it deserved better article treatment then it had before I worked on it, and worked very hard on re-writing it and turning it into a much better article than it was. I hope that after all of the things I did, as you requested, that this article is A-OK. Thanks again! CarpetCrawler (talk) 15:07, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Copy-edit comments[edit]

I'm going to copy edit this article, as well as put a few suggestionms here. Interested editors can then edit the article in accordance with these suggestions, or as they see fit.

Review from Realist2[edit]

Consistency issues[edit]

  • January 25 or 25 January? Pick one and run with it throughout article.
Question, do you mean the infobox and the lead having different ways of saying the release date?
Yes, on a quick glance I can't see other inconsistencies, but double check. Thinking about it, since this is a UK album, the date should come first. — R2 22:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Ohhhh, OK. :) Yes check.svg Done
  • It's Allmusic, not All Music Guide. No italics either Yes check.svg Done
  • Make sure publications include "The" where appropriate. It's The New York Times not New York Times. Yes check.svg Done
  • Change "American" to "US". Yes check.svg Done

Album title[edit]

I see you add references after commas. This is OK, but some people think it cuts down the readability of the article. If the issues being sourced are not controversial you could move the refs to the end of the sentence. It's not a big issue though, feel free to disregard the suggestion.

Yeah, I'll see what they'll say at the (Hopefully) future FA review. It doesn't matter much to me when I read articles. I think it's confusing when there's like ten citations after a sentence or paragraph.


The production section contains a lot of information unrelated to the production. This includes information on singles sales, MTV, music videos and popular culture issues.

Move the info unrelated to production to more appropriate sections of the article or make new sections suitable for it. I do suggest you make a section specifically for music videos. The popular culture info could be moved to a legacy/influence section.

Hmm... wouldn't a music video count for the production, sorta? I'm just thinking, since the section as a whole would be quite small, since most of Collins' videos are pretty straightforward, unlike, say, the Land of Confusion video he did with Genesis. Also, would I be able to add the pop-culture info to the Reception section in some way? I'll more than likely move the single sales stuff to the reception section.
Hmm, I suppose there is a concern that the sections would be too small if split out. The music video info could stay in there I guess. You could move the pop culture reference's to the reception section. — R2 16:27, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done OK, got it done.

Critical reception[edit]

This is good

Chart performance and sales[edit]

  • You could move a lot of the pro's info on singles sales (currently misplaced in the production section) here.Yes check.svg Done
  • Don't do (#4) and (#7), write it out in full.Yes check.svg Done
  • No UK or worldwide sales figures?
OK, I need some help here. Do you know of a place where I could find such information? I'm not very good at finding stuff like albums sold, etc...
I usually do a google search for world wide figures, for UK sales we could find out it's certified sales, which I'll go do. — R2 01:01, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, thank you for your help. :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 01:12, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Using as a source. The album has been certified 6 x Platinum in the UK, meaning it has shipped a minimum of 1.8 million units. His record copy hasn't paid for further certification awards. The 6 x Platinum figure goes back to 1989, so it's very outdated, but that's the record labels choice. It's a good start, so include it. We might find something more up to date later. — R2 00:03, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
I've been trying to browse that site... apparently it's password protected? Damn, that's lame. The website for the United States certifications is free to browse! Hmm... so how should I source it, since there's no way to access the specific page if you're not a paid member? CarpetCrawler (talk) 18:24, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't have to pay to use it, there is a free search database, just like the RIAA uses. But that link is enough for people to find the data base. The data base don't actually have a specific web link of it's own. It just branches off that link. Thus that weblink is the thing that will get you closest to the database. After pressing the link, you click "statistics", then click "certified awards", but notice the weblink never actually changes. — R2 18:32, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Added the info with the reference.
  • Move all info on Grammy Awards to Critical reception section.Yes check.svg Done


"and his success with Genesis having their highest selling album and Invisible Touch: The Tour". - Could do with some sourcing. Yes check.svg Done Removed it. It was a pointless add-on, anyway.

Live Aid[edit]


Remix album[edit]

More info needed if possible.

Unfortunately, since it is only a remix album (Heck, when it originally came out I almost didn't even know it existed,) there really isn't that much information out for it. I have a small piece of unsourced info that says that some of the remixes were from the 12" singles, but I'd rather add that when I can get a reliable source attached, and so far I haven't had much luck. Other than that, it's as detailed as I can make it.
OK, just remember to say that at the FAC :) — R2 14:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


  • Make sure publications are written correctly (according to their own Wiki page) and make sure italics are used correctly. Remember that "The", where appropriate.
  • Some of the refs are missing Author details.
The citations I used didn't ask for author details, but I'll take another look and see.
  • Current ref #4 from "" might not get through FAC
Yes check.svg Done, it has been removed.
  • Current ref #7 say's it's from "" but the ref is actually from "". This needs to be corrected unless it is part of "". If it's not part of the official site you might have problems using it at FAC.
Yes check.svg Done, site is no longer, but all of the posts were transferred over to Genesis' official message board.
  • Current ref #8 "" will struggle at FAC.
Reference is the official website of The Pump Room, so I think it's reliable.
  • Current ref #17 "" will struggle at FAC.
Yes check.svg Done Removed, it was a pointless trivial add-on.
  • Current ref #38 "" will struggle at FAC.
Yes check.svg Done Used the RIAA's official certification website instead.
  • Current ref #53 "" will struggle at FAC.
    • Use this link for reliable chart positions for singles and albums.
Yes check.svg Done and thank you! :)


You should deal with this section last

  • Does the lead really need to be sourced? All the details of the lead should be included and sourced in the relevant section of the article
Yes check.svg Done
  • Ensure everything mentioned in lead is also mention in article text. I haven't checked but make sure it is.
Yes check.svg Done
  • Looking at the paragraph on singles. It mentions US charts, then UK charts, then goes back to US charts. Do all US then all UK.
Yes check.svg Done
  • No mention of US, UK or more importantly Worldwide sales in the lead?
Yes check.svg Done
  • Make sure the details of the lead are in the same order of the article body.
Yes check.svg Done
  • Could you find more reviews for the info box? You only have 3. When I was getting Thriller (album) to FA, I faced opposition because I only had 2-3 reviews from the original 1982 release.
Yes check.svg Done, added another review

OK, let me know when that is resolved and I will give it a further look. I work in layers. Sorry for this long delay BTW. — Realist2 23:10, 26 December 2008 (UTC)


OK, I have fixed all of your concerns. Feel free to take another look and tell me if it's FAC ready. :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 16:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, I take a read of the article again in the next few days. — R2 20:37, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Sure! Take as much time as needed, I can wait. :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 20:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC) deadlinks[edit]

I am in the process of fixing those deadlinks in the references that lead to Phil Collins' former forum. Please do not remove the references. Thank you! CarpetCrawler (talk) 21:07, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Second review (please wait till I finish)[edit]

General issues[edit]

  • You should removed all empty parameters on your citation templates.
Yes check.svg Done Phew! That was the hardest thing to do! CarpetCrawler (talk) 21:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
  • A lot of your sentences start with "Collins ....", on a very long article this becomes tiring. Try mixing it up with "The singer", "The musician" etc etc.
Yes check.svg Done I agreed that it was tiring, but I wasn't sure if people preferred it that way or not... CarpetCrawler (talk) 03:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Duplicate Wikilinking in article, each section should link to the page in question only once.
You mean, as in (For example,) Sussudio should only be linked once in the entire article? Or once in each section of the article it is in? CarpetCrawler (talk) 20:30, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Once in each section as a maximum.
Yes check.svg Done
  • Bands and groups should not be in italics.
Yes check.svg Done... I don't seem to see anywhere where this happens. Am I missing something?
I think I got most of them.
  • It's 'number', not '#'.Yes check.svg Done
  • You really need to get a number consistency for this article. In my opinion, numbers 1-9 should we in words, ten or more in numerals.
Actually, you are correct. You spell out 1-9, and then type out the later numerals. Sometimes I did it correctly, other times I didn't. I guess sometimes I was forgetting when I was adding information, sorry about that! Yes check.svg Done


  • "Some of the songs from the album were works that were originally improvised by Collins. "Sussudio" was one of these songs.[6]" - Worded badly, with a very short sentence as well.
Yes check.svg Done I think my problem is that I write the same way I talk! :P
  • "In the video for "Don't Lose My Number", Collins did not know what he would make for a video, so he decided to create a video regarding not knowing what video to make for the song.[9][8] In the video, Collins talks to various clients and directors, all giving him bad ideas for the video. Collins parodies several other music videos in the video, including Michael Jackson videos, David Lee Roth videos, Elton John videos, The Police videos, movies such as Mad Max and various samurai movies.[9][8]" - This section needs a prose clean.
OK, how does it look, now? :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 22:48, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I made some further alterations, are these OK and factually accurate in your opinion?.
Looks great! :) Great job! CarpetCrawler (talk) 20:07, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
  • "The video, which features Collins playing the piano in a downtown bar,[8] was filmed at a pub owned by Richard Branson in London.[7]" - Is this the same pub as "Sussudio"? Also, no need to wikilink Richard Branson in this section.
Yes check.svg Done, they were both the same pub. I made sure to note that.
  • "While recording "Long Long Way to Go", Collins also asked Sting to provide backing vocals for this song. The music video features Collins singing in various places around the world, including London, New York, Tokyo, Moscow, Sydney, Paris, St. Louis, Los Angeles (Hollywood),[8] San Francisco, and Memphis (Graceland). At the end of the video, Collins arrives home and hears a woman from inside the house asking him where he has been. He replies by saying he's been to some of the cities mentioned above. The woman replies "You've been down at the pub, haven't you?"" - This song, with Sting is mentioned further up. Also, in that position further up, it says it was not a single, but here it says it had a music video. Join all the correct bits together, removing repetition.
I don't understand what you're asking me. "Long Long Way to Go" and "Take Me Home" both had backing vocals by Sting. "LLWtG" had no music video (And wasn't released as a single,) and "TMH" was released as a single, and had a music video. Could you describe what you want me to do? Maybe I'm just mis-reading what you're saying. Thank you. :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 23:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Ah, yes, my bad. I wasn't reading it correctly, it makes sense now. — R2 19:13, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
  • "The Man with the Horn" was originally recorded during sessions for Collins' second album Hello, I Must Be Going! in 1982.[22], and not released until it appeared as the b-side to "Sussudio" in the UK, and as the b-side to "One More Night" in the United States." - Broken sentence here.
Yes check.svg Done Fixed that up.

Critical reception and influence[edit]

  • "Collins was nominated in five categories.[33]" - Try to do something with this stubby sentence.
Yes check.svg Done.
  • "Take Me Home" was also the closing theme song for the World Wrestling Entertainment's television show, Saturday Night's Main Event from 1985 to 1988. In 2003, the hip-hop group Bone Thugs-n-Harmony based their song "Home" on this single. That version of the song featured Collins' chorus, and hit #19 on the UK charts." - All unsourced
Yes check.svg Done. I cited the first episode the closing theme was used, and the last episode it was used.


I don't feel the lead is an accurate summary of the entire article. The lead should take the main points from every section (and sub sections) of the article (obviously not sections on the tracklisting and personnel), in the same order as the article. Info in the lead should be proportionate to how much it is covered in the article, but you can't miss sections out, just because they are small. Leads can be tricky to write, but follow this advise and you can't go too wrong.

OK, how does it look? CarpetCrawler (talk) 22:48, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
The first paragraph could include some info on music videos. The second paragraph on the critical reception needs expanding. The third paragraph on the commercial reception needs a slight trim. — R2 19:21, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, how does it look now? CarpetCrawler (talk) 20:07, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
It's looking much better. Next I'll go through reference formatting with you. I'm very busy in real life over the next few days, but I will get back to you within 5 days. Best. — R2 23:22, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, I've finished for now, after that, call me back, and we can go through reference formation. Best. — R2 15:29, 21 March 2009 (UTC)


OK here is some feedback on formatting of references. It will likely be the most time consuming and boring aspect of getting the article to featured statues, but it must be done :(. It's best to try and complete all the points together, rather than doing each point individually, it will probably save you time. So read through everything before you begin. OK here are the points.

  • All web links need a retrieve date.
Yes check.svg Done
  • We need consistency in the date referencing. Publishing dates and accessdates are often in different formats for some reason. Also note that all publishing dates should be between brackets. Each aspect of the reference should be separated by full stops, rather than commas. There reference should also end in a full stop (this doesn't apply to book page numbers such as James, p. 10).
    • I will give you an example you should follow, using your first reference number as an example. I have emboldened areas you should take note of
      • Sheff, David (October 1986) . "Phil Collins Interview" . Playboy . Retrieved on 30 March 2009 .
Yes check.svg Done
Dates should be formatted like the example I gave above "30 March 2009", this extended to both publishing and retrieve dates. Sorry if I didn't make that clear before. If you don't want to do this manually, User:Gary King might be able to set up and run a bot for it. — R2 23:47, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
  • I see over linking of publishers. The publisher should only be linked once, on the first reference number it is used.
Yes check.svg Done
  • Titles should never have capitals (except for the first letter of words). "HOME VIDEO; Recent..." is not good.
Yes check.svg Done Sorry about that, usually I fix that, guess I forgot there!
  • Make sure all writers are included in references, I see some are missing, looking at the web links. Check the top and bottom of the source.
Yeah, they all have authors. I probably copied and pasted the cite template from an article that had no author. Oops! Oh well, I'll get to it (SO glad I'm almost done :)) CarpetCrawler (talk) 23:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done! Phew! OK, how does everything look? CarpetCrawler (talk) 23:36, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Change to Allmusic
Yes check.svg Done
  • Current ref # 65 is formatted poorly.
OK, before I go deep into this... for some odd reason, I am having trouble with this reference. Even though I fiddled with it for a little bit, it still keeps showing the URL when it shouldn't. Would you know what I'm doing wrong? :-/ CarpetCrawler (talk) 06:01, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
You only needed a publisher section, not a work section as well. ;D — R2 15:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
OK, my apologies for my blatant stupidity. :D Yes check.svg DoneCarpetCrawler (talk) 18:32, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
I've done some of the quicker stuff, when I get out of the shower and finish eating lunch I will work on the rest. CarpetCrawler (talk) 18:42, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, if you need anything please ping me and let me know when all this is done. Good luck, and don't give up. It's worth it in the end. — R2 19:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I have finished. Have I missed anything? And if not, do you have any other concerns that should be addressed? CarpetCrawler (talk) 23:36, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I dont want to just delete the whole paragraph, but....[edit]

The "Long, Long Way To Go"/Sting section is completely wrong. Live Aid occurred four months after the release of the album. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:40, 30 August 2011 (UTC)