Wikipedia:Peer review/Kid A/archive1

Kid A

This article has been accepted for GA and I would like to push it up to FA, so general comments would be appreciated. I believe the content compares favourably with all other FA album articles, but if there's anything specific to this album that is still missing, please could you let me know? Also, is 45kB too long? If so, is there anything here which could safely be omitted. Thanks - Alex valavanis 23:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Initial minor comments:

• •  Done A few of the citations in the lead section are actually unnecessary. Per WP:LEAD, the lead section of the article is a summary of the rest of the article, so the material included there should be cited in the body of the article. Use citations in the lead only when absolutely necessary (like with a direct quote or a very bold statement).
  •  Done Cite all chart positions in the "Charts". try to include as many non-US/UK chart rankings as you can.
  •  Done Expand the soundclip descriptions, a la The Smashing Pumpkins or Radiohead. The more you comment on the actual soundclip, the further fair use is justified (which is becoming more and more of a sore spot at FAC)
  •  Done Seriously, add "alternative rock" to the genre infobox. It's widely accepted as an alternative rock album (two notable examples include Allmusic.com and the Grammy Awards), no matter how different from other Radiohead releases it might be. It's definitely a more useful designation than "art rock".

I'll do a closer reading of the article soon. Make sure to check out Surfer Rosa and Doolittle for recent examples of how to make a great Featured Article on an album. Oh, and don't worry about the length; from the looks of it, much of that length is taken up by the citations which, while counted when you click edit and see the page size count, are omitted by length guidelines. WesleyDodds 04:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments - I've made all recommended changes, so let me know if you have any further suggestions. What do you think the chances are for FA? - Alex valavanis 08:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

FA-wise, read and use this guide thoroughly - 1a is often the toughest FA criterion for articles. JoeSmack ^Talk 17:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

• Reference 4 is broken. I'm getting a 404 error. ShadowHalo 06:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - it seems that all of the links at Sound Opinions are broken. I hope it's just a temporary problem, as the link doesn't appear on a web archive! I'll see what I can do. - Alex valavanis 09:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Fixed now - Alex valavanis 10:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 02:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)