Wikipedia:Peer review/A Crow Looked at Me/archive2

A Crow Looked at Me

Previous peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I intend to nominate it for FAR. Requesting specific attention to sources.

Thanks, DMT biscuit (talk) 07:33, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

NOTE: when you close this peer review, please be sure to remove it from Template:FAC peer review sidebar. If FA regulars have to do all the maintenance, they may stop following that very useful sidebar :) And please add the sidebar to your userpage so you can help out at Peer review! (I think you mean FAC, not FAR.) Good luck, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

DMT biscuit this peer review has been opened since July, and has plenty of feedback. I suspect there is no longer a bot that closes these, and they have to be manually closed. Would you like to close the PR? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:24, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Ykraps

I'm afraid that I don't have a lot of time to give at the moment but here's a few comments to get you started.

• "...is the eighth studio album to be recorded" – Is to be recorded? Perhaps simply say 'recorded'.

• "more in line with..." – This is a bit colloquial and needs an explanation. How is it similar?

• "A Crow Looked at Me was an immediate and widespread critical success" – Whose opinion is that?

• "appearing on numerous year-end lists" – Very few things actually are numerous so best to avoid. Also, consider adding a footnote to explain what an end of year list is and which ones the album actually appeared on.

• "In the years following its release, the album has become his best-selling release" – Nasty repetition of release. Why can’t you simply say the album is "his best-selling release as of (date)".

• "...retiring from music and becoming a full-time father" – Consider revising. Most working dads still think of themselves as full-time fathers. What about, "...to concentrate on raising his children"?

• "...influenced A Crow Loooked at Me's sound" – Should there be that many 'o's?

• "...he found the art he treasured was ineffective in helping him cope" – What art, and why would it help him cope?

• Lots of duplicate links - Joanne Kyger, Haida Gwaii, Sun Kil Moon, Dawn, Anacortes, Washington, The Glow Pt. 2, The Guardian, the Microphones, black metal, Now Only. There may be more.

• Quite a few examples of Wikipedia:Wikipuffery and WP:Peacock.

  @Ykraps: Please give examples. DMT biscuit (talk) 10:22, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

  Some of the sentences I would describe as puffery are:

A Crow Looked at Me was an immediate and widespread critical success, being one of the most-acclaimed albums of 2017 and appearing on numerous year-end lists. - lead

...was released on SoundCloud on January 25, 2017, to widespread acclaim - release and promotion

The April and September-to-November tours received critical acclaim - tour and live performances

Critics praised the shows' unique, intimate nature and some described it as of one of the most meaningful and memorable concerts they had seen - tour and live performances

A Crow Looked at Me received widespread critical acclaim upon its release. - reception

...earned some of the best reviews of Elverum's career - reception

...Since its release, the album has been viewed as a critical breakthrough and the peak of Elverum's critical acclaim - reception

It was overall one of the most critically acclaimed albums of 2017 - reception

I don't write this sort of article so I've no idea whether this sort of thing is the norm but I would say that these sentences appear to be opinion presented as fact, are not attributed to anyone in particular, and give the article the sense that it is a review and not an encyclopaedia entry.--Ykraps (talk) 06:54, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

@Ykraps: These comments are per the norm.

Example 1: Ok Computer (featured article)-"OK Computer received critical acclaim and has been cited by listeners, critics and musicians as one of the greatest albums of all time...critics in the British and American press generally agreed that the album was a landmark and would have far-reaching impact and importance."

Example 2: Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (featured article)-"Sgt. Pepper is regarded by musicologists as an early concept album that advanced the roles of sound composition, extended form, psychedelic imagery, record sleeves, and the producer in popular music. The album had an immediate cross-generational impact and was associated with numerous touchstones of the era's youth culture, such as fashion, drugs, mysticism, and a sense of optimism and empowerment. It is considered one of the first art rock LPs, a progenitor to progressive rock, and the start of the album era."

Most of these comments don't require attribution however I will try, when appropriate.DMT biscuit (talk) 19:17, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

'Critically acclaimed' is one of the phrases specifically mentioned by WP:PUFF which is why it stands out to me. Personally, I don't think these sort of phrases are at all necessary and any praise should be in the reception section where it belongs and where it can be properly attributed. Having said all that, it does appear that music articles have a much higher tolerance for this sort of thing. Inconsistencies like that are not uncommon in Wikipedia; sports personalities and computer games have a much lower threshold for notability for example. If you're happy then that's okay. These are just suggestions.--Ykraps (talk) 07:32, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

• To avoid constant repetition, try swapping out 'A Crow looked at Me' for 'the album' in a few places'.

I have to stress this is nowhere near a full review so keep this open as long as you can. I may return later but in the meantime, you might get some inspiration from similar featured articles.--Ykraps (talk) 05:21, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Gen. Quon

• "It features minimal production, sparse instrumentation, slow, winding melodies and intimate lyrics that tell of Castrée's illness and death, Elverum's ensuing grief and his relationship with their recently born child and nature after her death." This is a monster of a sentence that features a number of lists. I'd recommend dividing it up somehow. Also, "...and his relationship with their recently born child and nature after her death" reads kind of funny to me. Is "nature after her death" referring to the musician's life? or that of the child? or both?
• "possibly under a different name" For the record or is this in reference to the artist himself?

  Elverum thought of releasing the record under a different name.

• "Some critics found reviewing the album to be difficult because of its personal nature and felt disrespectful." That last "... and felt disrespectful" is really tacked on. I think this sentence would be stronger were it reworked to foreground the idea that reviewing an album about death could could across as disrespectful, rather than dropping that idea at the end.

  "A feeling of difficulty and disrespect was cited by some critics in regards to reviewing the album."

  I think that's too passive. How about: "Some critics found it hard to review the album, given its highly personal nature"?--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:05, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Much improvement, thanks. DMT biscuit (talk) 21:48, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Hopefully, I'll be able to dive into this some more. Until then, stay tuned.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 17:07, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

• "The album was created in 98 days." I think this is unnecessary, since you already stated the general time-frame in the previous two sentences.
• "recorded the songs in the art studio of his house, where she died. He had earlier abandoned the room...": Was the studio also the room in which his wife died? Or was the studio in a house that also featured the room in which she died? You might clarify that, because it seems to jump from "house" to "room" quickly.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:30, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
• "The conception of the record..." -> Maybe "This process was a result of habit..." instead?
• "Castrée's copy of Hergé's Tintin in Tibet can be seen in the background. Its title was explained by Elverum to represent the "uncomfortable feeling of applying significance to insignificant things". Two things: The bit about Tintin seems a little tacked on. Second: Is the "Its title..." part referring to the album itself, or the Tintin book? I'm assuming the former. In that case, I'd recommends triking the Tintin trivia bit, and changing "Its..." to "The album's title, according to Elverum, was chosen to represent the..."--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:30, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

  Changes made and appreciated. DMT biscuit (talk) 17:36, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments from SandyGeorgia

I'll review this (a former delegate, now called Coordinators, at the FAC process). But first, my general advice to FAC nominators is at User:SandyGeorgia/Achieving excellence through featured content. More later, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:14, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

• An excellent essay, and essential read before approaching FAC is at WP:RECEPTION.

• Handling this via a bundled citation is not ideal (see the essay above). Critics praised the shows' unique, intimate nature and some described it as of one of the most meaningful and memorable concerts they had seen.[116] "Some described" should be specific to those reviews, and overall adjustments per the essay would help solve the need for so much bundling; pick out the most signficant reviews from the the highest quality reviewers.

• There are WAY too many images, they are overwhelming the article, and the quote boxes are adding to the visually unappealing aspect. There is also MOS:SANDWICHing. See MOS:CAPTIONS for how to punctuate full sentences vs. sentence fragments on images.

• (still working) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:29, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

• This is not a sentence: Such as AllMusic,[146] The Atlantic,[147] BrooklynVegan,[148] Clash,[149] Consequence of Sound,[150][g] Complex,[152] The Daily Beast,[153] Digital Trends,[154] Earbuddy,[155][h] Exclaim!,[157][i] Fact,[159] The Guardian,[160] Los Angeles Times,[161] Magnet,[162] musicOMH,[163] The New York Times,[164] No Depression,[56] Noisey,[165] No Ripcord,[166] Now,[167] NPR,[168] The Oklahoman,[169] Paste,[170] Pigeons & Planes,[171] Pitchfork,[172] Popmatters,[173] Portland Mercury,[174] The Skinny,[175] Slate,[176] Spectrum Culture,[177] Spin,[178][j] Sputnikmusic,[180] Stereogum,[181][k] The Stranger,[183] Thrillist,[184] Tiny Mix Tapes,[185] Treblezine,[186] Uproxx,[187] Uncut,[41] Under the Radar,[188][l] The Village Voice,[190] and Vulture.[191]
  • And, this is not the best way to handle this. See the essay at WP:RECEPTION.
  • Ditto here: Such as 411Mania,[196] All Things Loud,[197] BrooklynVegan,[198] Consequence Of Sound,[199] Mwdwn,[200] Noisey,[201] Pitchfork,[202] Portland Mercury,[203] Spin,[204] Stereogum,[205] Tiny Mix Tapes,[206] Treblezine[207] and Vice.[208]

• See WP:ACCESSIBILITY; we shouldn't use color only to portray information or data (visually impaired can't sort that). Ranking in year-end lists (according to Album of the Year).[144]

• "Also" is almost always redundant. To prepare for FA-level prose, I suggest a thorough read of User:Tony1/How to improve your writing.
  • It was also ranked as the best album of March.[156]
  • It was also included on their list of the best albums of 2017 from January-June.[158]
  • It was also included on their list of the best albums of 2017 from January-June.[179]
  • It was also included on their list of the best albums of 2017 from January-June.[182]
  • It was also included on their list of the best albums of 2017 from January-July.[189]

• What makes these reliable sources? (The answer to that should be in the form of an About us or Contact us page or something that explains that they have fact-checking and editorial oversight. And, because a WikiProject says so will not pass muster at FAC.)
  • Album of the Year website.
  • For example, this gives nothing that speaks to the requirements for an WP:RS.
    • I suggest, based on these two, that you run through and check all of them relative to User:Ealdgyth/FAC, Sources, and You.

• There are faulty WP:HYPHENs and missing WP:ENDASHES on date, page and time ranges everywhere. I ran a script to fix them, but the script seems to have freaked out at the number of issues, so please carefully check that it didn't mess something up-- I couldn't find why it objected. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:43, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

• Prose redundancy, release ... release ... Since its release, A Crow Looked at Me is seen as an important release

• See MOS:LQ.

• I suggest as a main approach to FAC readiness that you read through everything I've linked here, do Tony's prose exercises, clean up the MOS issues, rewrite Reception and Accolades to WP:RECEPTION, and then ask for another copyedit. Good luck ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:47, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

• CMT Biscuit, the way to sort out some of the reception sourcing and citation bundling will fall out naturally if you work on the principles laid out at Mike Christie's WP:RECEPTION. As an example, look at Squirm#Reception, where Mike, GamerPro64 and I put a lot of work into writing that around identified themes. What this article is doing now is simply linking to every review, as a means of verifying general statements, and leaving the reader to sort it out. If you instead identify themes, you may end up with a few bundled citations to general statements, a few specific things to highlight about the most important reviews and themes, and a more coherent story for the reader. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:04, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

I am going to unwatch now; ping if further feedback is needed, but I think this is a good start. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:45, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments from Ceoil

Placeholder as read through. Having read about half, first impressions are v. good, and that just an overall polish is required before FAC. Ceoil (talk) 10:48, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

• Main areas for this review...I might copy edit directly if thats ok, spot checks will be required on the sources (verify that they back claims and that there is no close paraphrasing), agree with Sandy re long list of +ve reviews), some of the images could be better placed. Ceoil (talk) 11:23, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
• I don't think the images of Canada Geese, Foxgloves, Haida Gwaii and (especially) a random refinery add much.
• The needledrop review[1] of the album would be a good inclusion in the "Some reviewers found it a difficult album to review" para (which you should defiantly expand).

  @Ceoil: The needledrop isn't considered a reliable source. DMT biscuit (talk) 20:16, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

  Eh, yes it is. I use it all the time, and consider it certainly FAC worthy. Ceoil (talk) 20:17, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

  @Ceoil: While I would agree that the most popular and important music critic of today is worthy of inclusion, consensus says otherwise. Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources. DMT biscuit (talk) 02:34, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

• I agree with Sandy above re: RECEPTION, the article is quite listy in places, in other areas its this happened, then that happen, and then..ie more weaving into a narrative would help. Ceoil (talk) 21:38, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
• Elverum recorded A Crow Looked at Me between August 31 and December 6, 2016, at his house in Anacortes, Washington.[3][13] He wrote the songs over a six-week period beginning in September 2016 - the chronology seems confused here. Started recording in August...wrote the songs in September. 31 August is very close to the start of September...guessing that he began to write as the sessions started.

  Simply what the sources say, although I agree it is a little bit confusing. DMT biscuit (talk) 20:16, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

It seems you are synthesizing sources. Either August 31 or the start of September is wrong. Anyways, hold on, am reading through the sources, will update this....its important as gives key insight into the creative process. Ceoil (talk) 20:24, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

• I see you have Will Oldham mentioned as an inspiration, but he sounds strikingly similar to the man at times over the album, especially the mannerisms in "Real Death". Have sources gone into this in much detail. Ceoil (talk) 00:23, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

  No and any way that'd seem more appropriate for Elverum's own article, where Oldham is cited as an influence. DMT biscuit (talk) 20:16, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok, reading through critics see the comparison as superficial anyway. From listening, this is a totally different thing. Ceoil (talk) 21:37, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

• Again, is the timeline out of sync here On release, the album was promoted as being "gross and weird from a lot of perspectives". On January 6, 2017, he announced he would tour and release the new album. It was promoted before it was announced it would be, in fact, released? Ceoil (talk) 02:43, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
• In "Seaweed", Elverum describes the scattering of Castrée's ashes, the trip to Haida Gwaii he and his daughter took a month after Castrée's death - and or during? Ceoil (talk) 11:10, 25 October 2020 (UTC)