Wikipedia:Peer review/List of 1930s jazz standards/archive1

List of 1930s jazz standards

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This is the third part in a series of lists of jazz standards, two of which are already featured. This one has been expanded quite a bit and I would like to hear ideas for improvement before taking it to FLC. Thanks, Jafeluv (talk) 16:19, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the long delay in reviewing this. PR has been gridlocked for a few weeks (chronic shortage of regular reviewers) but I hope I will be able to post some useful comments in a few hours. Brianboulton (talk) 11:15, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: I can't find a great deal to comment on. The list seems to follow the style and format of others in the series, is clearly set out, properly sourced and referenced. I have only a few minor comments:

Lead image caption should identify which is Hart and which is Rodgers
Added "(left)" to the caption. Jafeluv (talk) 16:30, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"The time of the most influential recordings of a song, where appropriate, is indicated on the list." I believe by "time" you mean date or year, rather than duration, and this should be made clear. Also, I think "in the list" rather than "on"
Changed to "Where appropriate, the years when the most influential recordings of a song were made are indicated in the list." Jafeluv (talk) 16:30, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Benny Goodman needs a comma after him
Done. Jafeluv (talk) 16:30, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"well known" should not not hyphenated in this context
Done. Jafeluv (talk) 16:30, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
File:Rhythm changes.ogg could do with a more detailed description
Added some text about the rhythm changes to the caption. Jafeluv (talk) 16:30, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Porgy and Bess is normally classified as an opera rather than a musical
Done. Jafeluv (talk) 16:30, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hardly worth the wait, I know, but this is a well-prepared article that is probably ready for FLC. Brianboulton (talk) 12:40, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your comments! Jafeluv (talk) 16:30, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]