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.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic 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.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music articles
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.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
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.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in 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.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
while the two were attending BIMM Manchester - Might want to specify what it actually is, e.g. "attending the BIMM Insitue in Manchester". The average reader won't know what BIMM is, so giving them more context would be better.
"There’s a naivety and a purity to them and an honesty to them that kind of comes through in their music,” - Replace the curly apostrophes and quotation mark with straight ones
his producing their songs - While using possessive pronouns with gerund phrases is prescribed by some grammarians, most English speakers would expect a "him producing their songs" here.
Baron-Gracie admitted - The following quote contains a lot of ommisions and rephrasings, so much so that it gets awkward to read. Perhaps break up the quotes or remove some of it.
Coup de Main Magazine might not be a reliable source, but I'll let it slide here considering you're just using them for the tweet she posted. You also need to add them as the work in the citation template.
worked with the 1975 on their eponymous album (2013), I Like It When You Sleep, for You Are So Beautiful yet So Unaware of It (2016), and A Brief Inquiry into Online Relationships (2018) - This sentence feels somewhat like a garden path sentence on first read-through, making me go back and read it again to confirm what it actually meant. My suggestion for a rewrite: "on their eponymous album (2013), in addition to their following albums [...]"
Ones To Watch does not seem to be a reliable source, but I'll be treating it as a primary (or close to primary) source where applicable, as it seems to mostly support comments made by the band themselves.
This was actually discussed in the GA review for "There's a Honey". The reviewer there had similar reservations, but they were comfortable with my using the "Q&A: Pale Waves Guides Us..." source, since it's an interview with the band. (If it were an album review or something, I wouldn't use them.)--Gen. Quon[Talk]15:38, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Love Music; Love Life does not seem to be reliable either. The quote that you cite to them comes from a Fader article, so use that as a source instead.
The wiktionary link to "banger" could be more specific, i.e. wikt:banger#English:_piece_of_music (note for further reference: this only works if someone has used the senseid template on a specific entry on Wiktionary)
Link has been changed. I don't know much about the senseid aspect. Is there a good link for more info? I'm more than happy to make some changes on Wiktionary, if necessary.--Gen. Quon[Talk]15:38, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You can read the documentation at wikt:Template:senseid. The template is just added before the specific entry you want to link to (but after the #). This is how the wikitext currently looks at wikt:banger:
# {{senseid|en|piece of music}} {{lb|en|British|music|slang}} A powerfully [[energetic]] piece of [[music]], especially [[dance music]].
I honestly hadn't seen this functionality before a few days ago, so links using it seem fairly underused despite the fact that the template itself is used on a lot of pages. ArcticSeeress (talk) 16:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
– a song that Ones to Watch likened to the work of both Taylor Swift and Bruce Springsteen – - Ones To Watch is a blog, and therefore comments from them are not reliable. This should not be included.
and music video for the song, directed by Silent Tapes, was released on 11 April 2017. Matty Healy and Samuel Burgess-Johnson served as the video's creative directors - The Coup de Main reference doesn't actually verify anything here, and considering it is not reliable, I'd suggest removing it. The other source already does all the heavy lifting.
The Coup de Main source was backing-up the bit about Matty Healy and Samuel Burgess-Johnson serving as creative directors. I replaced it source with one that lists the production credits of the video.--Gen. Quon[Talk]15:38, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
and Samuel Burgess-Johnson - This specifically is not verified in either source, though.
The music video for the single was co-directed by Samuel Burgess-Johnson and Matty Healy debuted on 18 September 2017 - This sentence includes two finite verbs phrases (e.g. "was co-directed" and "debuted"). Remove one of them.
The song was mistakenly leaked on Spotify early on 27 April 2017 but was taken down shortly after - The source does not state the date. I also don't see why it needs to be in parentheses here, because you could have just included it with the previous sentence with an "although"
that sees Baron-Gracie taking on the persona of four distinct emotions - Coup de Main is not reliable. Either find another source for this information, or remove it.
Regarding the Anthony Fantano source, see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Sources: Rough consensus among editors was reached that Fantano is considered to be an established subject-matter expert as it pertains to music reviews and that that these reviews may be used in an article as attributed opinion. The information you cite him to here is not an opinion, but a matter of fact statement. This should either be attributed another source, removed entirely, or be supported by the rest of the text in the section.
You shouldn't write the score in the prose itself (e.g. perfect score, four-out-of-five star review, four out of five stars) ; that is already handled by the table on the right.
reviewer Stephen Ackroyd called the album "a glorious coronation, plain and simple" and noted that My Mind Makes Noises was a record of "such assured confidence it belies just how raw Pale Waves still are" - This isn't really of much substance here, as it doesn't actually give any insight into what the reviewer thought about the album beyond just "it was good" with some extra flair.
This feels like a subjective thing, to me. Personally, I find "emotional, arresting and endearing" to be a really interesting descriptor of the album, even though its abstract.--Gen. Quon[Talk]16:12, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Swedish songwriting factories - Why is Max Martin linked here? The source mentions nothing about him, so linking him here is probably original research.
The accolades table should probably have the rank and the list in the other order, as having it like this makes the reader view it in a very strange order. I.e. 1. they read the publication, then 2. they see the rank, but don't have any context for what it is for until 3. they read the list, and so 4. go back to the rank column to see the number again.
I've managed to find the week itself, but everything under rank 50 is locked behind an app, with the obnoxious "You can enjoy the Oricon Rankings even further!" I think a more sensible option is to just use the product page on Oricon, as the same information is stated there anyway. ArcticSeeress (talk) 16:36, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article has some small issues in regards to prose, but most of it is well written and follows MOS. It has some issues with verification, and some of the sources may not be reliable. The scope of the article is broad and doesn't go into unnecessary detail. The media used in the article illustrate the article, and are either free, or have acceptable fair-use rationales. The article is stable aside from you yourself editing the article, which will most likely end at some point. The article is also neutrally written. In short, if the issues in this review are resolved, then I'd feel comfortable giving this article a pass. I'll put this article on hold for the time being. ArcticSeeress (talk) 14:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@ArcticSeeress: I have responded to and/or implemented all of your suggestions. I wanted to talk about Coup de Main briefly. I'm not sure why it doesn't count as an RS here. It's a music magazine that has an chief editor[1][2], and it is verified by Muck Rack. That said, I'll try to find more reliable sourcing for the music videos. I feel like the interview citations, however, are pretty solid.--Gen. Quon[Talk]15:46, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Right, I did not think to use external websites when assessing the reliability of Coup de Main magazine. I only thought to look for an editorial board or policy on the website itself. I'll take a look through the article when I get the time. ArcticSeeress (talk) 15:53, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
