Talk:Badfinger/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: AJona1992 (talk) 16:55, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

General notes[edit]

Lead

01. "Picked up by The Beatles' Apple label in 1968, in 1969 they adopted the name Badfinger." - is this a sentence or a run through? Would consider revising to Picked up by The Beatles' Apple label in 1968, they adopted the name Badfinger, a year later. or something like that.
02. #1 - needs to be spelled out completely per WP:ORDINAL ---> "number-one"
03. #3 - needs to be spelled out completely per WP:ORDINAL ---> "number-three"
04. "Over the next 5 years" ---> Over the next five years
05. Wish You Were Here - needs year of release in (parenthesis) [sic].
06. "Polley's financial machinations, an eventual lawsuit raised by Warner against Polley over missing escrow account money, and Warner's consequent withdrawal from market of the album Wish You Were Here (seven weeks after its release), cut off the band's income and plunged them into disarray and despair." - this sentence is a bit too long, consider revising. Add some periods so it doesn't look like its all crumpled up.
07. "included damning comments" - what? maybe a typo. [It is the correct spelling].
08. "The next 3 years saw surviving members trying to rebuild their personal and professional lives against a backdrop of lawsuits." - consider revising to something like this The following three years, the surviving members had begun to rebuild their personal and professional lives against a backdrop of lawsuits.

The Iveys and Apple

01. Removed "," which is located before citation 5.
02. "It reached the Top Ten" - lower-case "top ten"
03. "but only #67" - spell out the number completely ---> "while it had peaked at number sixty-seven on the US Billboard Hot 100. The single had failed to chart in the U.K."
04. "a bold move at the time" - seems ORISH to me.
05. "The chart success of "Maybe Tomorrow" in Europe and Japan led to a follow-up single release in those markets in July 1969: Griffiths' "Dear Angie"" - would consider revising to something like this The chart success of "Maybe Tomorrow" in Europe and Japan led to a follow-up single release in those markets Griffiths' "Dear Angie", was released in July 1969.
06. "Maybe Tomorrow" - needs the year of release in (parenthesis) [sic]
07. Disc & Music Echo - needs to be italic.

Badfinger

01. "The release date of "Come and Get It" approaching" - would consider revising to something like this When the release date of "Come and Get It" was approaching,

All done.--andreasegde (talk) 12:00, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

02. "it reached Top 10 throughout the world: #7 on the US Billboard chart on 7 February 1970, and #4 in the UK" - would consider revising to something like this it had reached the top ten throughout the world and number-seven on the US Billboard chart on 7 February 1970, and number-four in the UK - question, which Billboard and U.K. charts did they peaked at?
03. "The album peaked at #55 on the Billboard album chart in the US" - would consider revising to something like this The album peaked at number fifty-five on the Billboard album chart in the US - which album chart did it peaked on?
04. "No Dice was released in the US in late 1970, peaking at #28 on the Billboard album chart" - (1) number twenty-six (2) which chart?
05. "A re-mixed "No Matter What" was released as a single, reaching numerous Top Ten charts around the world, peaking at #8 in the US, and #5 in the UK" - (1) no need to space remixed (2) should start it off with A remix version of... (3) Top Ten shouldn't be capitalized (4) number-eight (5) number-five.
06. "The hit song from No Dice turned out to be "Without You", but not for Badfinger." - why?
07. "Harry Nilsson recorded the song in 1972, and his version became an international hit, reaching the Billboard #1" - spell out the number completely ---> "number-one"
08. "award for Song of the Year" ---> award for "Song of the Year"
09. "All Things Must Pass" - needs the year of release in (parenthesis) [sic]
10. "Imagine" - needs the year of release in (parenthesis) [sic]
11. The sentence in parenthesis, [sic] can be fit in the article. Just not in the style currently present.
12. "New York's Kennedy Airport" - needs to be linked to "John F. Kennedy International Airport" "unusual/unknown places"
13. ""Day After Day" (Billboard #4)" --> ""Day After Day" (peaked at number-four on Billboard)" - or equivalent.
14. ""Baby Blue" (US #14)" - same as above.
15. "The album reached #31 on the US charts." ---> "The album peaked at number thirty-one on the US charts."
16. "By 1972, the band were contracted for one last album with Apple Records." ---> By 1972, the band were contracted for their final album with Apple Records.
17. "(US #122)" - needs to be written out.

Warner Brothers

01. ""Love Is Easy" (UK) and "I Miss You" (US), were unsuccessful." - not sure why U.S. and U.K. is in parenthesis [sic] here.
02. "A March 1974 concert at the Cleveland Agora was recorded on 16-track tape for a possible live album release" - (1) missing word "a" before the 16-track tape (2) 16-track tape --> sixteen-track tape.
03. "She remembered complaining that even though the band had had hit records" - remove repeated word "had"
04. "Polley began shopping Ham as a solo act" - what does this mean?
05. "Head First" - needs the year of release in (parenthesis) [sic]

A suicide, a reunion, and another suicide

01. "The single "Love is Gonna Come At Last" from Airwaves reached #69 on the Billboard chart" - needs #69 to be spelled out completely --> "...number sixty-nine on the Billboard chart(s)" - which chart(s) did it peaked at?
02. "This new Badfinger released their second album, Say No More, in 1981, with Glenn Sherba added on second guitar and Richard Bryans (Aviary) replacing Clarke on drums." - (1) is a contradicting sentence, since the next one says it was an LP record (2) Why does the sentence begins with "this new Badfinger released"? should start it out with "their second studio album" or something like that.
03. "reached #56 on the Billboard charts" - needs #56 to be spelled out completely ---> number fifty-six.
04. "Early in 1983, Evans and Jackson, with assistance from new member Al Wodtke (Kyx, Crow, Apostles)" - if not notable, per WP:BAND, then it shouldn't be in parenthesis [sic] rather revising it to ...new member Al Wodtke, who was in three previous (Rock) bands.
05. "Randy Anderson (Jesse Brady) of Minneapolis, Minnesota" - same as above.
06. "(see Badfinger line-ups below)." - remove this.

Subsequent Iveys and Badfinger releases and activities

01. Maybe change this section to "Legacy".
02. "A greatest hits collection culled from Badfinger's four albums" - is this a misspelled word? "culled" of "called"?
03. "In 1995, Molland was paid to re-record ten Badfinger songs, including their hits" - should it be written as so ", which included their hits"? Or is that not the case?
04. "In 2000, the "rough mix" version of Head First" - why is "rough mix" in quotation marks? - would want to explain that in the article if it was noted as so.
05. "(and inaccurately)" - don't see why this is in parenthesis, [sic] it can fit in with the article.

Post-Badfinger solo activities

01. "In 1995, Jackson joined re-joined The Fortunes" - well which one is it? lol
02. "7 Park Avenue and Golders Green" - both of these albums needs the year of release in (parenthesis) [sic]
03. "Young Savage Florida" - same as above. Was it released in 1996? - try not to confuse the reader.
04. "He then released 4 solo CDs" - needs 4 to be spelled out ---> "four solo CDs" - maybe instead of CDs would want to say studio albums.

Discography

01. Would want a table like many discographies on other bands and singers. Examples: Usher discography and The Beatles discography.

Pictures

01. All pictures (except the picture of the band in the infobox) fails WP:NFCC#3a. Consider removing them.

Final notes[edit]

The article needs some help. I'm going to ✗ Fail the article. Some GA-Class band articles (like Decapitated (band) and Aerosmith) can help to be model articles to [sic] this one. After you have addressed the concerns that I had [sic] stated above, you may want to nominate the article for a peer review. They will give you helpful tips before nominating the article for GA. This can help enhance your chances at [sic] GA status. Cheers, AJona1992 (talk) 19:12, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have corrected all of the above in the article that actually needed fixing, although it is perplexing that the reviewer failed this article for what were fairly minor problems that haven't taken long to fix. This is probably explained by the fact that the reviewer stated on his own talk page that he would be "on holiday" for one or two months, which gave him no time at all to deal with corrections. Unbelievable.--andreasegde (talk) 13:01, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand some of the GA critique, but some comments are simply personal preference. For one, Badfinger's discography is rather limited when compared to Usher or The Beatles. To incorporate the same format would be awkward. There would be more countries listed horizontally than recordings are listed vertically. And although AP format does demand all single-digit numbers to be spelled out (1, 2, 3 ...9), the organization has always accepted numeric symbols for two digits and greater (10, 11 ... 999). Further still, the reviewer appears to have trouble with certain words; for example, "culled" is an English word and derived from "culminated."

Andreasegde, I think you simply had bad luck on this one. Perhaps there is an appeal process for a different reviewer? -- ZincOrbie (talk) 13:50, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know, Zinc, I know. :)) It was easy with a couple of other recent reviews, but I'll put this one down to the quirks of Wiki. Que Sera, and all that.--andreasegde (talk) 11:19, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've had enough of this. I will now take all of the articles I have nominated for a GA review off the list. At some time in the future (when some good and reliable GA reviewers return after their summer holidays), I will nominate them again. The GA reviews have become a joke.--andreasegde (talk) 23:10, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]