Talk:Afrique Victime/GA2

Latest comment: 6 hours ago by TheNuggeteer in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Nominator: TheNuggeteer (talk · contribs) 09:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk · contribs) 22:00, 22 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'll review this. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧(talk | contribs) 22:00, 22 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
  1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
  1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
  2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
  2b. 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).
  2c. it contains no original research.
  2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
  3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
  3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
  6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
  7. Overall assessment.

Quickfail criteria

edit
  • 1.  Y
  • 2.  C Will do a copyvio check later, as Earwig is down.
  • 3.  Y No cleanup banners.
  • 4.  Y Article is stable.
  • 5.  Y A previous GA review quickfailed this article because the version at the time was not broad in its coverage. Since then, you have expanded the article significantly and addressed all the concerns brought up the first time.

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧(talk | contribs) 22:43, 22 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Vigilantcosmicpenguin A month ago, I remember checking the article for Copyvios, with a 56.7 percentage (from what I can remember), I don't think many major edits were included after that. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 22:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

First impressions

edit
  • A bit too much of "On May 21, 2021, [song X] was released." This is simply redundant as the album was released on that date.
  • Most sources look good, even if some are smaller publications. However, The Fire Note and ThePsychRock.com appear to be blogs, Genius.com and Sonichits are user-generated, and you cite a few record stores which are not editorial publications (Nail City Records, Capsule Records).
  • A few quotes should be attributed, such as the "gateway" description in the lead section.

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧(talk | contribs) 22:43, 22 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

I feel like The Fire Note and ThePsychRock.com is pretty reliable, will remove the others. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 23:23, 22 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
Can you explain what makes these sources reliable? I'm not seeing that they're peer reviewed, or have been cited by other sources. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧(talk | contribs) 23:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
Will also remove the bandcamp sources, as stated from the previous review, since the date released is no need (except if it's different). 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 23:25, 22 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
  Done 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 23:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Lead section

edit

Background

edit
  • Mentioning his debut album seems tangential, especially if its source is just a listing of a concert.
  • I don't see a source for the list of his previous albums. This should be removed, as it's tangential to the article, unless the albums are mentioned in the context of Afrique Victime.
  • I would say the subsection "Documentary" seems misplaced; I would expect "Recording process" to come before it. Maybe move "Documentary" to "Release and touring", since it came after the release?
  • Mdou Moctar is the name of the singer as well as his band, but the article at points isn't clear which it's referring to. For example: since Mdou Moctar, as he said in an interview with Reverb, is reluctant to spend too much time cooped up in a studio, they recorded the album in intervals, over a few weeks. (If "they" is the band, then write "the band" to be clear.)
  • There are some other grammatical errors, and style errors such as overusing the word "also". I'll copyedit the article later.

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧(talk | contribs) 00:05, 24 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Release and touring

edit
  • Lead section uses DMY but this uses MDY. Which one are we using? (Either one could work, since the album was recorded in both the U.S. and Niger.)
  • You cite the announcement of the tour, but it'd be better to use sources from during or after the tour. (It's possible that, say, Mdou Moctar announced tour locations that were later cancelled.)

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧(talk | contribs) 00:05, 24 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Vigilantcosmicpenguin Will do later since my location has a power outage. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 00:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)Reply