Talk:ATLiens/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: DivaKnockouts (talk · contribs) 02:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Alright, here it is. Forgive me as I'm not familiar with the group's work so I may get something wrong. Just let me know. — DivaKnockouts (talk) 04:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Lead

• "The duo sought to improve on their 1994 debut album Southernplayalisticadillacmuzik and gain respect for their burgeoning Southern hip hop scene." — Okay, I don't understand this sentence at all. It comes off as confusing to me, could you consider rewording?
  • Better now? --Khanassassin ☪ 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
    • Better. Thanks. — DivaKnockouts (talk) 22:40, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
• Why isnt it noted that the album charted internationally?
• Otherwise, the lead looks very well structured and organized. Good job.

Background

• You should probably explain what/who OutKast are, for the readers who aren't familiar with the subject.
  • Done. --Khanassassin ☪ 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
• "In 1994, Outkast released its debut album,..." — Why are you referring to the group as "it" shouldn't this be their? They have genders right?
  • Done. --Khanassassin ☪ 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
• What are the Source Awards? Again, for the unfamiliar reader.
  • Done. --Khanassassin ☪ 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Recording

• Rename to "Recording and production" as you talk about production as well.
  • Done. --Khanassassin ☪ 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
• "The duo refrained from using samples on the album,..." →"The duo refrained from sampling on the album"
  • Done. --Khanassassin ☪ 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Composition

• Everything looks fine here, including the sound samples.

Title and promotion

• This section's title is kinda weird to me, maybe rename to "Release and promotion" since you talk about the album's release.
  • Done. --Khanassassin ☪ 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
• If you decide to rename, rearrange the paragraphs to talk about the album's release first and then the paragraph about the title.
  • Done. --Khanassassin ☪ 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
• "Its title is a portmanteau of "ATL" →The album's title...
  • Done. --Khanassassin ☪ 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Reception

• Was at least one negative review? All I see here are positive reviews.
  • Actually, no... OutKast are one of the most acclaimed rappers ever, for real. --Khanassassin ☪ 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
    • I've never heard of the group (only solo member Andre 3000) so it's a little hard to know. I guess. — DivaKnockouts (talk) 22:40, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
• Again, why isn't it noted that the album charted internationally?
  • Usually, the article's prose is based on secondary sources that have written about the topic. Only charting at 16 and 82 in Canada and Germany didnt really get much independent coverage, so it wasnt notable enough to include here, whereas the album's domestic success was. Dan56 (talk) 21:09, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
• WP:OVERLINK of "Jazzy Belle"
  • • Charting in the top 20 of a country is not notable? I think it deserves at least some type of mention. Would I suggest "The album reached the top 20 in Canada, while attains chart success in one other country internationally"? — DivaKnockouts (talk) 22:28, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
      • It's simply not necessary; notability is decided by how much attention this information received from reliable independent sources (Wikipedia:Notability). The album's chart debut and sales were covered by news articles and warranted inclusion in the article's prose. Speaking of its charting in Canada as the "top 20" is fanciful and makes it seem more important than it actually is; if it was notable, wouldnt there have been more coverage apart from an archived magazine page? Per WP:LEAD, the "emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic, according to reliable, published sources"; the importance of it charting at number 16 in Canada is not established in the article. Dan56 (talk) 22:39, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
        • Well maybe not in the lead but at least in the commercial performance where it is necessary. — DivaKnockouts (talk) 22:53, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
    • Every charting from the bottom-of-the-article section doesnt need to be reiterated as prose; the duo arent Canadian, and number 16 on a chart that ranks sales in a country significantly smaller than the US is an awkward one-liner at best, but that would disrupt the flow of the prose, which exclusively discusses Outkast's market. Dan56 (talk) 23:03, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Done. --Khanassassin ☪ 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Legacy

• Who are Wiz Khalifa, Dom Kennedy and Jesse Marco (I know who they are, again for the unfamiliar reader)
  • Done. --Khanassassin ☪ 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
• If Jesse Marco doesn't have an WP article, is he notable enough to included here?
  • Not having an article does not make someone unnotable. Jesse Marco is quite well-known, notable enough for a little mention in the article. --Khanassassin ☪ 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
    • Alright. — DivaKnockouts (talk) 22:40, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Tracklisting

• This needs a source.
• The sampling really needs a source.

Personnel

• This section is unreferenced. Each section needs a reliable source.

• Added citation from liner notes for both "Tracklisting" and "Personnel" sections. Basilisk4u (talk) 19:56, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

• Okay, it looks like everything has been addressed, except: Why isn't it noted that the album charted internationally in the lead and especially in the commercial performance section? — DivaKnockouts (talk) 21:01, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

References

• Refs 16 & 17 need publishers
  • Done. --Khanassassin ☪ 20:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
• Link every work and publisher the first time you use them
  • I think I did that. --Khanassassin ☪ 20:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
• Delink afterwards per WP:OVERLINK
  • Yep. --Khanassassin ☪ 20:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
• Refs 41, 43, 57 are dead. Replace them to support chart positions.
• No red links (Wang, Oliver)
  • Done. --Khanassassin ☪ 20:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Overall article

• I see you change from OutKast to Outkast, stay consistent with which one it is.
  • You still have addressed this, you need to stay consistent with what their name is, is it OutKast or Outkast?
    • Done. Dan56 (talk) 23:59, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

• Putting article on hold until issues have been addressed. Regards. — DivaKnockouts (talk) 04:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

— DivaKnockouts (talk) 00:59, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the review! Basilisk4u (talk) 22:08, 12 February 2013 (UTC)