Talk:Janet Jackson's Rhythm Nation 1814/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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.

"Jackson, Jam and Lewis, routinely watched television news reports" - commas make it hard to read.
- Done The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Only 2 pro. reviews can be found for the infobox?
- Those were the only two I found online. This is a possible third though im not sure if its notable to be added. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - The Sputnik review is fine per Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums#Non-professional reviews (as he's staff) You don't have to use online reviews in the infobox; for magazine reviews just state the month and year of the issue (or similar). —Giggy 09:27, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yeah, I just read WP:ALBUMS and I added the review to the info box and the reception section. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 09:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Originally, executives at A&M wanted Jackson to expand on the ideas presented on Control," - what ideas were they?
- No indication has ever been given. I've read online biographies as well as old news reports found through my college online data base. Even the reports from 1989 don't say anything more than "she sent an A&M exec home and went forward with her own idea. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - The Control article should have some basic (sourced) information on ideas... at least mention that in general terms so some context is given. —Giggy 09:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - DoneThe Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 10:15, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For ref 7, can you just link directly to the Allmusic page?
- Done (now ref 8)The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 10:21, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"had been a former member of The Time;" - what's that/what relevance does it have?
- removed. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Production section is rather short - was production so smooth that nothing of note happened?
- I have no idea, but i've found no mention of extensive production commentary from any source. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You don't need to include the years for the Audio samples (do you?)
- removed. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:55, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"that schoolyard shooting in Stockton, Calif." - is there a relevant article on that to wlink to?
- Done The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think the Critical section should be in past tense, and you that you should expand it.
- Done The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 10:29, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't the Release and promotion section go before the Reception one?
- DoneThe Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 09:04, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"On 24 April 2007, iTunes added all of Jackson's A&M-era albums to their music library." - ref?
- removed. its just triva. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 09:04, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 33 shouldn't have the article title in italics.
- that's due to the citation template. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"The album earned Jackson eight Billboard Music Awards" - italics for Billboard
- DoneThe Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"including older brother Michael Jackson and Madonna." - reads like Madonna is an older brother. Use comma.
- Done The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Having the tables side by side makes the formatting a bit awkward... I wouldn't bother; just go one below the other.
- Done The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Album title in external links should have italics?
- Done The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:54, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's the lot - done offline - please leave me a note when done. Cheers —Giggy 07:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.