Wikipedia:Peer review/No Jacket Required/archive2

No Jacket Required

Previous peer review

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for April 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to nominate this article for Featured Article Review, but I'm not 100% sure that even after a GAR, one peer review, and numerous copyedits by numerous other users (With a HUGE helping hand from User:Realist2 as well,) if it is ready or not. I am listing this article so that I can see if anything else needs to be done, any improvements need to be made, and I want to see if the article is ready for a FAR. The article has come a long way from its original status before I began working on it Click here to see what it looked like before I began my work on it in December. Thank you, and I appreciate any comments that anyone can give me about this article. Have a great day! :)

Thanks, CarpetCrawler^{message me} 21:28, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This article is generally well-written and clear. I have concerns about quoting so much copyrighted work from a single source and about the relative lack of images. Here are my comments and suggestions:

Lead

• "The record has been certified diamond in the US, and has reached 6x platinum in the UK." - For readers who might not know what "diamond" or "platinum" refers to, you might consider slightly recasting and then linking, thus: "The record has been certified diamond by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and has reached 6x platinum in the UK." Specifying and linking the entity that awarded the "6x platinum" designation would also be helpful. I don't actually know whether "6x" is part of a designation or certification or whether 6x stands for "six times". done
• "for appearing at both the Philadelphia and Wembley Stadium Live Aid events on the same day." - Delete "both"? done

Album title

• The quote from Playboy is unusually long. A rule of thumb followed by newspapers is to use no more than 100 quoted words from any single source. This quote by itself is about 200, and the problem is compounded by the two other fairly long quotes, one of about 50 and another of about 100 words, from the same Playboy article. This use of so much quoted material may be outside the bounds of fair use under copyright law. Are the long quotes really necessary to understanding the material? Are they justifiable for their content, or is their main purpose simply to improve the layout?
• "The singer would often appear on shows such as Late Night with David Letterman... " - Suggestion: "After the incident, the singer often appeared on shows such as... " done

Production

• "considered one of his more popular songs to have not been released as a single" - Suggestion: "considered one of his more popular songs not released as a single" done
• ""Take Me Home" is another song where the meaning was originally very vague." - "in which" rather than "where"?done, I agree with that choice, too. CarpetCrawler^{message me} 07:40, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
• "Some of Collins recorded work did not appear on the original album. However, "We Said Hello Goodbye", which appeared as a B-side to "Take Me Home" and "Don't Lose My Number" originally, was added as an "extra track" on the latest CD releases." - What year does "the latest" refer to?

I have no clue, honestly. Do you know where one can find information on when the CD was re-released with such track information? My hunch says it happened in 1998, but I could be wrong. I don't have the CD in front of me. CarpetCrawler^{message me} 07:40, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't. Finetooth (talk) 17:47, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'll see what I can find. In fact, maybe even the original CD release had the song... CarpetCrawler^{message me} 19:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

done Found it, thanks to the powers of the Allmusicguide! :) CarpetCrawler^{message me} 06:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

• "However, the song was not released until it appeared as the b-side to "Sussudio" in the UK, and as the b-side to "One More Night" in the United States." - Capital B on B-side (in two places). done
• "which also did not appear on the album, originally appearing as the b-side" - Ditto. done

Critical reception and influence

• "Geoff Orens of Allmusic, in a review written years after the album's release, said that while some of the songs are "dated", the album contains "standout tracks", where he describes "Long Long Way to Go" as "one of Collins' most effective ballads", and "Take Me Home" as "pulsating". - This is awkwardly glued together with "where". Better would be: "Geoff Orens of Allmusic, in a review written years after the album's release, said that while some of the songs are "dated", the album contains "standout tracks". He describes "Long Long Way to Go" as "one of Collins' most effective ballads", and "Take Me Home" as "pulsating". done

Chart performance and sales

• "Meanwhile, "Don't Lose My Number", a single that Collins only released in the US, peaked at number four on the Billboard Hot 100 charts during late September 1985,[44] and the b-side of the single was "We Said Hello Goodbye"." - Another B-side. done

References

• Citation 34 has a date, Oct. 29th 2008, that should be 29 October 2008. done

Images

• The image is OK and the license is probably OK. It would be good if you could find additional images, perhaps taken by people at concerts and uploaded to the Commons or to Flicker with Creative Commons licenses.

I have found an image from Flicker. However, the user does not provide the date, but does say that they attended that concert, and has other pictures from other concerts they attended, so they may have taken the photo. How would I be able to get permission from the user to put the photo on Wikipedia, and how would I be able to contact that user to do such a thing? CarpetCrawler^{message me} 06:08, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Good questions and ones that I have wondered about. I have never actually added a Flicker photo to any of the articles I've worked on. However, I would do so if I found it useful, and I've seen quite a few perfectly fine, properly licensed photos on Wikipedia that are sourced to Flicker pages. Quality and content questions aside, the Flicker photo license tag is the key to deciding whether it can be used on Wikipedia or not. To be used, the Flicker photo must have a public domain or Creative Commons Share-Alike license with no commercial restrictions. Here is an example that I found this morning of a photo that could be used on Wikipedia: sample photo. Under "additional information" in the right-hand column, you will see a line that reads, "Some rights reserved". When you click on that, you will see the license page that gives details about the CC-by-SA 2.0 generic license. It's this license that makes it fine to use the image on Wikipedia as long as the source is acknowledged (and linked to from the Wikipedia image description page) and the license replicated. For this, you don't have to write to the photographer or anyone to ask for permission because the license gives permission. In the case of a Flicker photo that has copyright restrictions that do not allow replication or that do not allow commercial re-use (which might appear as NC, meaning "no commercial" in the license tag), you would have to persuade the copyright holder to re-license the image as CC-by-SA. CC-by-SA 3.0 is a more recent version of CC-by-SA 2.0, and that is what I would suggest to the photographer (copyright holder). I have not ever tried to write to a Flicker photographer, but I'm pretty sure there is a way. You might have to set up a Flicker account, or maybe there is another way I'm not seeing this morning. I'll leave this part of the problem for you to figure out, and I'd appreciate knowing how you solved it. Finetooth (talk) 17:23, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I hope these few comments prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 23:43, 17 April 2009 (UTC)