Talk:Smiley Smile/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Homeostasis07 (talk · contribs) 01:37, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Ilovetopaint: I'll be reviewing this article over the next few of days. I'd hope to get the bulk of the review done by tomorrow night, but straight off the bat there are a couple of issues you might be able to fix. There's a one-sentence paragraph in the Differences from Smile sub-section (perhaps you could re-arrange the section to incorporate three fuller paragraphs?); and the Personnel section is tagged as being incomplete, which needs to be removed one way or the other. If you could fill it out, cool, but looking at both Discogs and AllMusic, it seems that the album was originally released with little to no credit information, and that doesn't seem to have been rectified on the 2012 reissue. Overall, this looks like a good article, and should be no problem getting it to GA-status. I'll respond with (hopefully) my full review within 24 hours. Homeostasis07 (talk) 01:37, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

 Done --Ilovetopaint (talk) 04:20, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

You may have noticed that I've made this edit. Like I said before, this looks like a good article – and it is – I just made some tweaks to the prose in the body, namely:

• Overuse of the album title in the article: I realize there needs to be quite a bit of distinction between Smiley Smile and Smile, since the two titles are so similar, but there was a bit of overuse—I [sparingly, to keep confusion to a minimum] replaced some uses of Smiley Smile with "the album" or "the record".
• In Background, I also changed "Dennis Wilson called the album a product of its context,..." to "Dennis Wilson said of the album...", because the former didn't make much sense.
• I also removed the hidden quote from the composition and analysis section.

That being said, although the actual WP:BODY of the article is fine, there are some issues with WP:LEAD:

• We need to remove all citations in the lead. Just make sure what's cited there is included in the body.

Need or should? I'm not aware of any such guideline or policy - even The Beatles contains refs in its lead. (I've removed them anyway) --Ilovetopaint (talk) 22:35, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Need: see the Citations section of WP:LEAD: the lead should just be a summary of sourced information contained in the latter sections of the article. Exceptions are for quotations and potentially controversial/challengeable material. Homeostasis07 (talk) 23:55, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

• "the lowest chart placement the band had yet had for a record" - remove repetition of "had"
• "After settling payment disputes..." This isn't mentioned in the rest of the article.
• "Smile was left unfinished while the group embarked on new projects." - Again, this isn't mentioned in the rest of the article.

This never came to fruition and, instead, the group embarked on a tour of Hawaii in August. --Ilovetopaint (talk) 22:35, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

• "Carl Wilson famously compared Smiley Smile and Smile to "a bunt instead of a grand slam".[7][8]" - Again, not in body.

Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:09, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Ilovetopaint: I'm putting the article on hold until you sort out the above issues in the lead. Homeostasis07 (talk) 16:16, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

 Done--Ilovetopaint (talk) 22:35, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm satisfied that this article satisfies GA. Passing. Well done! Homeostasis07 (talk) 23:55, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Closing

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

7. Overall:

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.