Talk:...And Then There Were Three.../GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
GA nomination failed because not everything was sufficiently addressed in time, primarily the section for critical reception. Commercial performance could've also used some elaboration. Feel free to renominate once everything listed here has been improved upon.

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.

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 16:38, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Mine! Expect initial comments within a few days. Ping me if I don't have anything up by the 17th. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:38, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh crikey, a Snuggums review, this'll be detailed (I remember Talk:Genesis (band)/GA1) - still it'll make the article much better so I'm not going to complain.... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:46, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It most definitely will be very detailed! You shouldn't have nearly as much to worry about here, though, when this article is far shorter. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:48, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let's kick it off with the infobox and lead.....

Infobox[edit]

I only have a source for month / year, and have added that. Editors come along all the time and add the full dates without sources; if just one of them would add a source, it would be a miracle. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:51, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead[edit]

  • If the exact release date for this album is known, then I would include it
I don't have a source beyond month / year - LowSelfEstidle, have you got anything suitable? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:53, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello sir! I'll have another look around, but as far as I can remember a specific date was almost impossible to find. LowSelfEstidle (talk) 08:51, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just found March 31st here! Snuggums (talk / edits) 02:41, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, nice find! Is it fine to have a source dated before the album was released? It's still not concrete proof it was released that day. LowSelfEstidle (talk) 12:15, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you can find anything that indicates a later release, it's perfectly fine, also there is proof either way of a 28 March 1978 in the US and earliest release should be mentioned in infobox and lead even if it isn't one's home nation.
  • Not sure whether use of slashes is appropriate here per MOS:SLASH
Not a clue - The Rambling Man would probably know. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:53, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As long as it's consistent within the article, always spaced or always unspaced, it's fine. It's fine. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:38, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is "commercially accessible music" supposed to mean?
Changed to "chart friendly" ie: poppier music that was more likely to appeal to a wider demographic and hence hit the charts; something unlikely to happen to "Supper's Ready", for example
  • The use of "with a peak of" from "since their formation with a peak of number 7 in the UK and number 23 in the US" feels off when there's multiple nations mentioned, maybe by peaking at would be better
I've reworked this sentence a bit. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:53, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is it really necessary to note that Phil started writing more of the songs here? That doesn't seem nearly as prominent as him taking on lead vocals.
He'd never written much of Genesis' material at that point. He joined the group very much as a player, it was only when they were reduced to the core trio that there was enough space for him to contribute anything. It's one of the reasons Steve Hackett left. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:32, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be back with more later. Probably going to do this section-by-section. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:07, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Production[edit]

Background[edit]

  • Starting two consecutive sentences with "he" is repetitive.
  • "felt his desire to work on a solo career had outgrown his need to work as a member of the band" is rather wordy, and I feel something like became more interested to work on a solo career than with the band sums it up more succinctly
Both fixed by rewording Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:35, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "they had finished recording and were mixing ...And Then There Were Three..., on 8 October 1977"..... No; they had finished the album entirely
Tweaked Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:35, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Writing and recording[edit]

Tweaked Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:39, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe I'm missing something, but I fail to see how Phil Collins writing more of the songs than before is worth noting, and it's not even suggested here that he became more of a songwriter anyway (only notes he wrote three tracks though that bit is fine to have)
See above, but copyedited. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:39, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Its ref still doesn't have any comparisons to his lyrical involvements in past albums or mention any ideas of his, so you'll have to cite something else for such detail (yes I'm nit-picky like that) Snuggums (talk / edits) 02:41, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Bowler / Dray biography mentions the opposite, so rewritten for that. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:59, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I find the tone of "a hit single was missing from their repertoire" questionable, maybe "they had lacked successful singles" would be better
Reworded all of this Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:39, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

More to come in the future. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:40, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Songs[edit]

  • Non reviewer comment: Minor question under Songs subsection it states of Follow You Follow Me that Rutherford wrote the lyrics in "about ten minutes" whereas the Follow You Follow Me article has the song's lyrics written in half that time - "about 5 minutes" (unreferenced). I didn't have access to this article's reference to see which claim was correct. Thanks  Spintendo      18:18, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've dropped in another source which says "not quite ten minutes"; also changed Follow You Follow Me to follow suit. (I wonder if the "five minutes" is sneaky vandalism?) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:39, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The claim was placed there 6 years ago by Rodericksilly who is still an active editor. At that time they placed a paragraph of text in the article, and they cited the paragraph to a magazine article by Jon Young entitled "Genesis Look at themselves - An Autodiscography" (Trouser Press magazine, 1982), a citation which still exists in the article today as a reference for the quote that was originally part of that paragraph Rodericksilly added. Perhaps the claim was misread or misprinted in that source.  Spintendo      16:44, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
None, I think. It's been nuked. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:35, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Banks's first solo album A Curious Feeling"..... his solo album count isn't relevant here
It is, because it was his first, having been committed to Genesis at that point, and directly re-used a theme from this album. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:35, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unless I've missed something, this doesn't state or even suggest that "Scenes from a Night's Dream" involves Little Nemo at al
Bizzare. Replaced, with a source. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:50, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "a more heavy track" → "a heavier track"
Fixed Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:12, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sleeve design[edit]

  • "As with their past three studio albums"..... not everyone who reads this article is automatically know which ones these are (especially when not big Genesis fans), and I have a feeling that such detail is probably better for the Hipgnosis article anyway; focus more on what they did with this cover art
However, people getting as far as reading down to this section probably at least are interested in Genesis (those that aren't would never even get this far!) so it's nice to have some consistency. Plus Hipgnosis have designed so many albums, it would make their article a trivia magnet if we included all of them! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:13, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Release" will follow in my next batch. ♫ It will follow you, will it follow me? All the bits and pieces that we must fix soon. I will review this, will you work it up? Just one single section before the tracklist. ♫ :P

Release[edit]

Done Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:12, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Did you fix that? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:12, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No I just searched for it through OCC Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:39, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Aaaargh, bare urls. Forgot to check that one. Fixed. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:53, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are any UK sales for album known, or even a certification?
Not a clue, this isn't my speciality Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:12, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • RIAA doesn't provide album peaks, so we need a separate citation for the Billboard 200 position, and I thankfully knew just where to look :)
Added Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:51, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since certifications don't automatically equate to definitive sales figures, even for those released before downloads and streams were tracked, "selling" or "sold" is potentially misleading and it likely would be better to say 500K or 1M copies were shipped
  • You mention three singles released, but only provide support for "Follow You Follow Me" and "Many Too Many". Please be consistent and mention here all singles known for certain to have been released.
The article previously said three, but I only have sources for two, so that needs to be trimmed down Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:12, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since you mention a US peak in the lead for FYFM, I would also do so here (and it obviously needs to be cited). You definitely should also note how it was their breakthrough track. Perhaps we could additionally compare its commercial performance to how "Many Too Many" charted.
"Breakthough" is subjective, to the hardcore people who think that Supper's Ready is the greatest song ever made, ever, this may be sacrilegious, to the 80s fans, they didn't really get into gear until Abacab where they were hitmaking material, and to the hardcore fan, the breakthrough track is more likely to be "Afterglow" from Wind and Wuthering which might have been a hit single itself had it been released as one. In short - bit too much POV to mention. Keep it at "highest-charting single", that's a concrete fact that can't be argued with. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:12, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I obviously meant commercial breakthrough as it brought them much more fame (as well as fans) after previously having little to no chart success (especially outside Europe). Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:39, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I found something in Bowler / Dray's biography and dropped that in. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:04, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's quite good for the album, but I'm saying you should also talk about how the track itself immensely boosted their popularity. It would additionally be nice to mention (and of course cite) the single release dates here. Snuggums (talk / edits) 02:36, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well the source doesn't say that. It does say the Genesis were on the verge of a commercial breakthrough, and Collins put his marriage on the line to do the tour, but it was Duke that really cemented their status (first number 1) and then Face Value and Abacab put them in the serious big time. ATTWT was more an intermediate step. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:07, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why isn't the "reissues" subsection up closer to the album's release?
Nobody thought to do it - fixed Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:12, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Tour" and "Critical reception" should be their own sections
Agreed, and done Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:12, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I have time to comment on for now. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:52, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reissues[edit]

  • My only concern is how this only talks about the 2007 reissue; you'll need a separate source for the 1994 one.
I suppose we can cite the CDs themselves, with serial numbers, so I've done that. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:35, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Getting closer and closer..... Snuggums (talk / edits) 02:36, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Right, what's left? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:46, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Still have to assess "critical reception", "tour", tracklists, and citation formatting. Should at least get critical reception out within a day or two. Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:43, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception[edit]

  • If you can find anything that mentions an overall favorable/mixed/unfavorable reception, then I'd include it here
  • This section should be expanded with reviews from publications you've listed in the scorebox
  • I'm not convinced "Wall-of-sound" is likely to have its own article anytime soon, so let's unlink that
Changed link. Phil Spector's Wall of Sound is more famous than Genesis[citation needed] Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:00, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Charley Walters wrote a review for Sounds and notes"..... it's from Circus and this is rather wordy, try something like "Writing for Circus, Charley Walters noted that"
Agreed. Fixed. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:58, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Up next is "Tour". Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:56, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tour[edit]

Done, though I'm not sure exactly how notable all these Genesis tour articles are; I've already got 3-4 deleted at AfD. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:59, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "would need to be able"..... needed to be able
Done Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:59, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "didn't" should be "did not" per WP:CONTRACTIONS, and is "gel" really appropriate tone?
Reworded to something else Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:59, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • It might be worth adding tour earnings if that can be found
I've added something about tour costs, which is close. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:59, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The second and third paragraphs are a bit short, maybe merge them so the text doesn't look so choppy.
.... or beef them up a bit with something else. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:59, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Track listing[edit]

I've combined the sections, though I'm not sure about hatting the B-sides in the same manner as the CD reissues as discussed in those articles. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:06, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What you've gone with seems fine. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:04, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

B-sides[edit]

  • See above comment on "Track listing"

Personnel[edit]

  • Nothing of concern

I'll next check citation formatting and then re-scan the article for anything else that still hasn't been addressed or new things that come to mind. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:12, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hokay. Sorry, I've been off-wiki for a couple of days (which sounds like a lot for me!) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:08, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Citations[edit]

  • "allmusic.com" → AllMusic (no italics), and "AllMusic" shouldn't be part of the "And Then There Were Three – Genesis | AllMusic" title
  • "robertchristgau.com" shouldn't be italicized
  • Remove "Rolling Stone" from "Genesis: And Then There Were Three : Music Reviews : Rolling Stone"
  • Delete the "via Newspapers.com" bit
  • Cirucs → Circus
All done Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:45, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Books[edit]

  • Seems fine

DVD Media[edit]

  • All good

Final assessment to come. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:04, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Overall[edit]

  • Prose: Mostly good, main concerns are how original release should go first even if outside the UK, lead needs to include both singles, and Sounds in "critical reception" is supposed to read Circus
  • Referencing: A few malformatted citations, but nothing major. Anything mentioned within lead should also be cited within article body (I don't see support for US peak or the album having more "radio-oriented and chart-friendly" material than past works in there)
  • Coverage: Critical reception section still needs to be expanded, and so does detail on commercial performance for singles (i.e. note the peaks for each track, talk about how "Follow You Follow Me" boosted their career)
  • Neutrality: This is A-OK
  • Stability: Nothing of concern
  • Media: All appropriately licensed
  • Verdict: Starting now, this is on hold for seven days to address the remaining issues. Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:34, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ritchie I'm really sorry for this, but time's up for the hold and you couldn't get enough done before it expired :/, so I'm failing the nomination. The biggest remaining issue is how critical reception still needs to be expanded to include more reviews. I even noted that you could use those included in the score box. It just isn't long enough right now with only 5 reviews, especially for what was by far the band's biggest commercial success (at the time of its release). You also still need more for commercial performance of singles and a mention of how they helped the band gain popularity. Once that's all set, be sure the lead takes into account such success before you renominate. Better luck next time bro. Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:43, 6 May 2018 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:...And_Then_There_Were_Three.../GA1&oldid=839836610"