Talk:Venetian Snares x Daniel Lanois

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

Electronic music Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Possible source

I can't access this site in the UK. I thought I'd put it here in case anyone else can use it.
https://http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/la-ca-ms-california-sounds-daniel-lanois-jennifer-warnes-gene-clark-20180525-story.html Alduin2000 (talk) 19:26, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Alduin2000, try this or this. Also I recommend avoiding "dateline" prose structure whenever possible ("In March 201X, Y. In April 201X, Z.") czar 19:51, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll keep that in mind, thanks. Alduin2000 (talk) 19:57, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Alduin2000, fwiw, I also recommend Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections on writing holistic Reception sections czar 20:30, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar: I was roughly organising it by how positive the reviews are but I'll take into account other factors too, thanks for the tip. Alduin2000 (talk) 20:36, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar: just out of interest, would you recommend splitting a single review up into multiple different paragraphs so each paragraphs retains a single (or almost single) point or should each review be summarised completely together? Alduin2000 (talk) 20:52, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the review contents. Ideally you could group review contents by subject (e.g., ¶ on influence/sounds like/cultural allusion, ¶ on technical detail and production quality, etc.) I'd only group by reviewer as a last resort, mainly because it's boring to read a list of reviewers sequentially and more interesting to read a holistic account of general reviewer consensus on the record. czar 20:56, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]