Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Anniemal/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 04:03, 12 August 2009 [1].
- Nominator(s): PiracyFundsTerrorism (talk) 00:02, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
| Toolbox |
|---|
GA since September, with a peer review not long after that. I was hoping to get some actual sales figures in, and luckily Billboard finally mentioned them this year. Some of the citations aren't online, so please let me know if you need text from the original. PiracyFundsTerrorism (talk) 00:02, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Done; thanks.
The lead (infobox) image needs alt text as per WP:ALT;it's another argument to {{Infobox Album}}. Later alt text assumes that a visually-impaired reader knows what Annie looks like, which is unlikely for the typical reader; I suggest that this problem be addressed by describing her appearance in the lead infobox image. Eubulides (talk) 00:35, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]- Thanks for that. I hadn't realized they'd updated {{Infobox Album}} with that. To save anyone else the time, the other two images did also have alt text. PiracyFundsTerrorism (talk) 02:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments -
- What makes the following reliable sources?
- Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:03, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- For the first one, see my reply when you mentioned it at the peer review (in short, the statement is by Annie herself). The second is the Norwegian equivalent of the American Music Center, and both are members of the International Association of Music Centres. PiracyFundsTerrorism (talk) 19:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- the problem is that how do we know that the interview was reported reliably? Newspapers and magazine interviews rely on their reputation to make their interviews trusted, we need to consider the reliability of the site itself even when it's an interview. As for the other, I'll leave it out for other reviewers to decide for themselves. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:31, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't believe a publication's reputation has much to do with its reliability, but since you don't think the site is reliable enough to report the interview accurately, I've reworked that part with other sources. PiracyFundsTerrorism (talk) 00:04, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- the problem is that how do we know that the interview was reported reliably? Newspapers and magazine interviews rely on their reputation to make their interviews trusted, we need to consider the reliability of the site itself even when it's an interview. As for the other, I'll leave it out for other reviewers to decide for themselves. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:31, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- For the first one, see my reply when you mentioned it at the peer review (in short, the statement is by Annie herself). The second is the Norwegian equivalent of the American Music Center, and both are members of the International Association of Music Centres. PiracyFundsTerrorism (talk) 19:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- "Anniemal is the debut album of Norwegian electropop singer Annie, first released by 679 Recordings in September 2004 (see 2004 in music)." Almost sounds like Annie was released in September 2004. Suggest "Anniemal is the debut album of Norwegian electropop singer Annie that was first released by 679 Recordings in September 2004 (see 2004 in music)."
- "Upon release, the album was successful in Norway. Blogs leaked tracks from the album before it was released internationally, and publications from other countries soon praised the album for its blissful but melancholic sound." I think it would make more chronological sense if these sentences were switched.
- The chronology is correct here. It was released in Norway, the tracks were spread outside Norway via the Internet, at which point it received publicity outside Norway. Should a word other than leaked be used? PiracyFundsTerrorism (talk) 19:09, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "The label did not heavily promote Anniemal for its international releases in 2005, and the album eventually sold over 100,000 copies worldwide." The connector "and" makes this confusing, as you say that the album was not heavily promoted, then go on to say that it did well anyway (IMO, 100,000 copies sold = doing well). Perhaps "but" makes more sense here?
- "He died eighteen months later, in April 2001." Numbers over nine are spelled out.
- Numbers "may be rendered in words if they are expressed in one or two words" according to WP:MOSNUM. PiracyFundsTerrorism (talk) 19:09, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "had a limited edition release in 1999, selling out in two days."-->had a limited edition release in 1999, which sold out in two days.
- Modified. PiracyFundsTerrorism (talk) 19:09, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What happened to "I Will Get On"? Was it released?
- Yes, clarified now. PiracyFundsTerrorism (talk) 19:09, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "so Annie would record demos by asking to use" More straightforward as "so Annie recorded demos by asking to use"
- "The two had planned on writing a song titled "Anniemal", so she chose it as the album's title because she said "it just made sense. Anniemal is simple and easy and good."" It sounds like the title was chosen because she said those exact words.
That's all I have time for now; will definitely return. An interesting read. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:46, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.