Talk:The Amazing Jeckel Brothers

The Amazing Jeckel Brothers 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 10, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

Albums

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

Hip hop Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hip hop, a collaborative effort to build a useful resource for and improve the coverage of hip hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Hip hopWikipedia:WikiProject Hip hopTemplate:WikiProject Hip hopHip hop articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Psychopathic Records (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychopathic Records, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Psychopathic RecordsWikipedia:WikiProject Psychopathic RecordsTemplate:WikiProject Psychopathic RecordsPsychopathic Records articles

Jewel Case

Do all copies come with a red jewel case of is that just the one i bought

Answer: No. icp rules

I know it says ain't you diggin' what we say? But it is actually ain't you getting what we say. An example can be found, here

http://www.juggalonews.com/main/Hidden/index.php —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.195.17 (talk) 15:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jake and Jack (moved from article)

YOU GUYS GOT IT ALL BACKWARDS!!! JAKE IS THE YELLOW GUY WITH RED HAIR! JACK IS THE RED GUY WITH YELLOW HAIR!

Jake the just. "angel" Jack the sinister."devil"

Jack is always throwing curves to screw up their juggling act.

Response

I have the edition with this cover. It says "Jake Jeckel" at the bottom of the slipcover and on the back of the jewel case inlay. See: http://img2.freeimagehosting.net/image.php?b4a545122c.jpg (72.153.117.72 (talk) 01:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Message

I've removed the Message from the article. I've done this for a number of reasons:

The text is copyrighted but unattributed, so without attribution, use infringes.
Substantially the entire text is used in the article, so it's hard to argue fair use.
We present no commentary on the text, so again, we can't argue fair use on the grounds that it's needed for commentary.

I'm open to it being reincluded if—and only if—a compelling argument can be made that use in the article is within the bounds of the non-free content policy and that rationale is stated here for discussion and agreement. —C.Fred (talk) 02:35, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If something is on the internet (text wise) it is free, is it not? Mastermarth (talk) 00:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope it's definitely not. If you want to include text verbatim in an article, you need to abide by fair use rules (use only minimum amount needed, critical commentary, etc). Bill ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:19, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

so we cant quote the message from ICP's website??Mastermarth (talk) 03:09, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not in its entirety, and not outside of the context of commentary about the message—which would require bringing in information from a reviewer, academic or the like who does the critical analysis of it. —C.Fred (talk) 03:12, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article Nomination

Nominated... Gen. Quon (talk) 02:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Amazing Jeckel Brothers/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 22:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
In the lead, "...as opposed to the rock-oriented sound of its predecessor, The Great Milenko" ---> "...as opposed to the rock-oriented sound of its predecessor, The Great Milenko (1997)", so that it can provide context for the reader. In the Recording and production section, "...and was instead released on a later album, 'Psychopathics from Outer Space" ---> "...and was instead released on a later album, Psychopathics from Outer Space (whenever it was released; 1999 or 2000)".
Check.

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
In the lead, and throughout the article, "...released on May 25, 1999 by Island Records" ---> "...released on May 25, 1999, by Island Records", commas after dates, if using MDY. In the lead, it would be best if "Recording Industry Association of America" was followed by ---> (RIAA), I mean, I know what it means, but how 'bout your reader, also per here. In the Musical style section, please link "Steve Jones" to its correspondence article, as at the moment it stands out as a disambiguation. In the Recording and production section, the dash in the part where it says Bruce felt insulted, needs to be an endash, as emdashes don't need space between them. Also, you might want to add "ICP" after mentioning Insane Clown Posse, I mean I know what ICP means, but how 'bout your reader. In the Lyrical section, the quote box, the quote shouldn't have quotation marks within quotations, per here.
Half-check.
Check.
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 22:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Two more bits left. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 21:46, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Check [on both].

Thank you to Sugar Bear and Juggalobrink for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 16:02, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Amazing Jeckel Brothers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091130013723/http://www.nme.com:80/reviews/insane-clown-posse/1015 to http://www.nme.com/reviews/insane-clown-posse/1015

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:32, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Amazing Jeckel Brothers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:44, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]