Talk:Time Out of Mind (Bob Dylan album)/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: — Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well well Sayantan Mitra. You are one lucky son of a gun today! I will be reviewing the article for GA status. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quick fail checks[edit]

The article suffers from gross MoS violations: I will list them.

Per Checklinks, none of the references are correctly formatted with the {{cite web}} template. You use the template, but then don't use the parameters correctly, like forget to use the last and first paramters, the work parater etc. This is all-through the article.

Still not done. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 15:05, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do them soon. But I don't really get your point. To inform you, I used the software ProveIt to add most of the references in this article and it by default uses Citation Style 2 templates. And, unfortunately, the parameters last and first are not listed there. It uses a "Author(L, F)" parameter. Though I'll add the work parameter. And thanks for reviewing this article.--Sayantan (talk|contribs) 15:34, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want my advice, donot use any software for any citation template. Manual doing is always the best way. I will continue with the prose review since you have started work on the MoS violations, although I would advice you to see articles like The Fame, or even Confessions on a Dance Floor to see how chart performance and charts are generally formatted. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 15:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've added work parameters to the concerned template whenever applicable, throughout the article. I didn't add last and first parameters though as I said in my previous comment. I like your suggestion for not using any software. I'll try to follow it henceforth. Though this piece of software saves a lot of time and labor. (You can try it also, if you want.) Anyway, the chart position and certification in the article is mostly drawn from this article on Spanish Wikipedia (which is already a GA). Since this table currently displays the total information in a compact form I decided to keep it. Do you really want me to change it? Thanks.--Sayantan (talk|contribs) 17:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I would really advice you to follow the standards of the English Wikipedia, rather than Spain. They are filled with MoS violations etc. The charts really need to be worked on. And please remove teh weeks on chart column. These kind of information are really considered as fancruft, and becomes non-notable for lesser charts. Places like UK, US, you can talk about how many weeks the song was on the chart, but not in a table, you should include it in the prose. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One Disambiguation link

Done Removed the link.--Sayantan (talk|contribs) 14:08, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Other MoS issues I saw in a basic glance was the unnecessary quote boxes for one line quotes, the bolding of song names, the flag addition of the charts etc. Please remove them all.

Done All aforementioned issues addressed.--Sayantan (talk|contribs) 14:08, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please correct these violations and I will start on the prose and other reviews soon. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 06:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prose review[edit]

I have a gut feeling that this one is going to fail on WP:GA?1a alone.

Lead

released in September 1997 on Columbia Records. --> why not the actual date?
Time Out of Mind is hailed as one of the singer-songwriter's best albums --> Why the circular connotation? Simply say "Time Out of Mind is hailed as one of Dylan's best albums."
Also, the album is ranked #408 on Rolling Stone's list --> Highly discouraged the usage of the hash sign.
This is a regretful clause, but please you have to extend the WP:LEAD. It doesnot conform to the rest of the article, misses the summarization of major points and is frankly poorly written.

Background

Who the hell is Zollo?
Dylan's last album of original material had been 1990's Under the Red Sky, a critical and commercial disappointment. Since then, he released two albums Good As I Been To You and World Gone Wrong of folk covers and MTV Unplugged, a live album of older compositions; there had been no signs of any fresh compositions until 1996. --> Why aren't the albums italicized? And why is this whole para unsourced?
Criteria Studio in Miami, Florida was booked for recording. --> When?
Lanois recalled Dylan talking about spending a lot of late nights working on this chapter of work --> Who is Lanois? You did not introduce him.

Recording

Dylan demoed some of the songs in the studio, something he rarely did --> demoed? Britannica doesnot have the word.
Elements of Dylan's touring band were involved in these sessions. Dylan also used these loose, informal sessions to experiment with new ideas and arrangements. --> Elements of touring band? Now how absurd is that. How can a touring band be transposed to something abstract?
By now --> By when?
The rest of the para needs serious copy-edit.
Years later, when asked about Time Out of Mind, Dickinson replied --> The associated quote makes Dickinson say the lines in such a way that it hardly seems that he was asked about the album "years later"
The first quote box corresponds to the background section, not recording.
Another unsourced para, including the quote. You need to include everything, including issn, volume, issue from Guitar World if it is a physical magazine.
That whole quote about Buddy Holly is more of a reflection of the artist about Holly. No where it elaborates that TOOM was influenced by Holly. Its just another case of Dylan's eccentric comment.

OK I give up. This article is seriously in need of a peer review and a thorough brush-up, keeping in mind the present album GAs or FAs. I am seriously shocked to read The Songs and Aftermath sections. To the nominator, this could have been a wonderful article on par with some of Wikipedia's best. But its just extreme poor construction is what is leading to its fail. As I noted above, please compare this article with the album GA's I pointed, and you can resubmit after the prose clears up, and the citations are added. Yes, the article somehow lacks citations in many areas. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]