Talk:Ariel Pink/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Czar (talk · contribs) 02:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nicely done, @Ilovetopaint, particularly the scaffolding. Some comments:

  • Use "Pink" instead of "Rosenberg"

    People who are best known by a pseudonym should be subsequently referred to by their pseudonymous surnames
    — MOS:SURNAME

But he's quoted in the article saying that "Ariel Pink" is not supposed to be a pseudonym.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 11:14, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have another bullet point on this below. Gist is that if "Ariel Pink" is his common name in the sources and thus the article title, then he's better known by the pseudonym and per the quoted guideline, would be "Pink" throughout the piece czar 01:03, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Gonna reach out to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies for this one --Ilovetopaint (talk) 11:08, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Side note: Kind of interesting that the article's quoted elements (which I still hope will be paraphrased) all refer to him as Pink czar 12:54, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Checked the liner notes for the original albums and found that he's been calling himself "Ariel Pink" since as early as 2001. --Ilovetopaint (talk) 15:10, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Done--Ilovetopaint (talk) 11:14, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Direct quotations overused throughout—can afford greater paraphrase here, which would amplify the effect of the quotes that remain
  • Really, at least a half or closer to 3/4 or nearly all of the quotes can/should be paraphrased
I planned to work on that when I have the time--Ilovetopaint (talk) 11:14, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the article was passable without it, but others will take umbrage for reasons of copyright, so I recommend reducing it sooner than later. (The audio fair use rationale updates mentioned below are similarly urgent.) czar 12:54, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambig Anthrax
  • Watch consecutive sentences that use "He" instead of Pink
  • uninterested more precise than disinterested (which more often describes unbiased interest than lack of interest)
  • wikify music jargon: amp, cassette, CD-R, eight-track
  • '96: use straight apostrophe
  • "ultimately accumulated between 200 and 300 cassette tapes of material"—as of when? misleading if not referring solely to his pre-college output (in which case, can move to later ¶)
 Done all above--Ilovetopaint (talk) 11:14, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • reduce undue emphasis on "The Last Art Piece" (e.g., instead call it one of his art pieces, a three-foot-tall mural that ... led an administrative member to unsuccessfully sue the school for sexual harassment) just make it more concise to attract less attention
 Done? --Ilovetopaint (talk) 11:14, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • missing closing quotation mark at that ¶'s end
  • Beachwood not Beechwood
  • "Recalling the time" awk, rephrase
  • "widely distributed," needs period
  • " personality-- the album" use {{em dash}} (two examples later too)
  • "karaoke style" hyphenate
  • 'contempt.").' lose double punctuation or simply recast
  • "not being very good" meaning what? at performing or playing or poor songwriting?
  • "don't get paid, So I can't" punctuation
  • "two more of his previous" → "two of his previous"
 Done all above--Ilovetopaint (talk) 12:11, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • the Tim Koh quote needs more than a colon (this is still prose)
  • 'Pitchfork awarded it the accolade of "Best New Music".' recast to be less hagiographic, e.g., Pitchfork highlighted the album as among the year's best. (or best of new releases, something to this effect)
  • "the number one track" → "the year's best track"
  • "newly-recorded" -ly adverbs don't need hyphen
  • again, these quotes need to be paraphrased: for concision, clarity, copyright
  • 'he said "I could dissolve' comma between
  • by the Sperske lawsuit line, the reader hasn't retained Sperske's identity so introduce with the epithet of "drummer" or something more crafty
  • "A court settlement was eventually reached" invert to rmv passive voice
  • some of these reviewer quotes would be block quotes, but there's no editorial need to quote at this length
  • "which rose to number 150" readers who jump to this paragraph will need a little more context
  • "its credit and his last" recast so the subjects are clear
  • "Rosenberg reported to the" he didn't report but he "told" surely
 Done all above --Ilovetopaint (talk) 13:44, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • paraphrase this whole "man everyone hates" incident—it reads as tabloids, just get to the basics without the mudslinging
not sure how? The reader will want to know what the specific comments were.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 13:44, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's partially the point—as an encyclopedia, we're looking to paraphrase the dispute, not offer a blow-by-blow unless the dispute is some fundamental aspect of the biography (which it isn't, in this case). For instance, drop the primary source refs and summarize the secondary source coverage, which likely doesn't do a blow-by-blow either. I can take a rough stab if wanted. czar 12:54, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Done? I summarized the last quote in that paragraph. But I think what you're asking is to remove the comments from Faster Louder because it's not a "fundamental aspect" of the story ... even though the story is about those comments? I don't see the logic there.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 02:02, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Brooklyn based" hyphenate
  • "a four-star review" out of what?
  • "Goldner reviewed that the album" awk
 Done all above--Ilovetopaint (talk) 13:44, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Rosenberg intimated that his desire" is this original research or does the source make this claim?
It does: "In interviews around this record, he has sounded weary and reserved by comparison, insisting he doesn’t want attention or care about releasing records anymore. Mostly he talks about Jameson." --Ilovetopaint (talk) 13:44, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Portastudio proper noun
  • disambig Spencer Clark and lose the comma
 Done all above--Ilovetopaint (talk) 09:41, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • the Haunted Graffiti section can be incorporated into the general band history above (and if it's meant as a point about his rightful surname, our sources call him Ariel Pink, which is used as the article title, his common name, hence why Pink becomes the surname for subsequent use)
 Done /  Not done I moved some of it to the general history. I don't think the article would benefit not having a dedicated subheader explaining the meaning of "Ariel Pink" and "Ariel Pink's Haunted Graffiti".--Ilovetopaint (talk) 09:41, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I can see the virtue of the separate call-out if it were instead a kind of personal history section on his identity, but in terms of the band's history and its portrayal in sources, the article is already mostly a history of that moniker (for which he is best known) hence why it makes sense to cover in the existing section. I'm not adamant, but that's the logic. czar 12:54, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Done --Ilovetopaint (talk) 02:02, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • some of these publications in the references should be wikified when applicable (the guardian, fact uk magazine)
  • metacritic ref doesn't need cbs interactive and paste doesn't need wolfgang's vault—the work title is sufficient and publisher field is predominantly for books
  • consider pulling out the external links into {{external media}} for use within the article
  • |state=expanded for ariel pink navbox
  • rmv links to Atheif (circular redirects)
  • lede: 'he is frequently cited as the "godfather"' frequently? article only cites one instance
 Done all above --Ilovetopaint (talk) 09:41, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • lede could stand to be expanded with mentions of the effects of his other major albums
 Not done outside of The Doldrums and Before Today? I'm not aware of how the other albums were influential. --Ilovetopaint (talk) 09:41, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The lede doesn't appear to properly attribute Animal Collective/The Doldrums for launching his career, as it reads more like the album was released on their label and his popularity just ambiently grew afterwards. But you know the source material better. His last two albums charted so I would mention them by name as having been released, even if you feel there is nothing specifically remarkable about their contents or reception. Not adamant about that either, though. Might also be worth describing the aspects of his personal for which he is best known ("the ... retro, androgynous, psychedelic image that would mark Ariel Pink out in the 00s") czar 12:54, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • [re: "ambiently grew afterwards"] Yes, that's correct.
  • [re: "last two albums"] No, Mature Themes charted too, and I think it's been more or less forgotten. I would have thought Pom Pom might deserve a mention in the lead, but I couldn't find anything about it that stood out. I don't feel it's encyclopedic to mention albums in the lead just for the sake of mentioning them.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 02:02, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • [re: "retro, androgynous"] I recall many interviews that characterize him as "flamboyant", "opinionated", or a "freak", but there would've been no encyclopedic way to incorporate those sources in the article without creating WP:SYNTH or an awkward paragraph like "John Doe feels Rosenberg is 'flamboyant' while Jane Doe thought he was 'a freak' [...]". --Ilovetopaint (talk) 02:02, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • no mention of drugs in the lede? it's a major theme throughout the rest of the article
 Not done what is there to say? --Ilovetopaint (talk) 09:41, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
From what I read, I was drawing a connection between his prolific period and his drug use, but not sure if that's reflected in the sources. If indeed it was a major factor of his songwriting process, that would be the context for the lede mention. czar 12:54, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think I included every source that mentions his past with drugs. It's not discussed often even though it seems like it is/was a big part of his life. --Ilovetopaint (talk) 02:02, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA criteria

  1. Well written: Mostly. Great structure, clear, mostly concise, some minor stuff noted above. Most glaring/dire issue is the overquoting, which should be addressed ASAP. The GA prose bar is low enough that this passes without the changes, but hope it will warrant your attention nonetheless.
  2. Refs good, lowest quality refs are interview sources. No copyvio via Earwig but plenty of overquoting (see above) to be fixed. Ran other tools.
  3. Breadth: Addresses subject's early life, work, reception, legacy without delving into unnecessary detail.
  4. Neutral, with some points on weight noted above
  5. Stable
  6. Free image rights look good (hey look I transferred File:Ariel Pink circa 2010.jpg) but the fair use rationales on the two audio files are junk. You'll need to transfer WP:NFCC#8 contextual significance details from the in-article audio captions to the FUR templates themselves. I personally don't see the justification for the Among Dreams sample based on the given text, but I'll let you make a better case for that if you want. The Round and Round sample at least has the backing of being a definitive moment in his sound, by one reviewer's account. Again, the fair use templates on the audio file page need to reflect the NFCC reasoning behind its inclusion, or what does the audio provide that cannot be provided from paraphrased text alone, and what sourcing warrants the importance of this specific clip? Likely won't keep both clips either unless there is a strong case for both of their non-free use.
I don't know how the audio samples fail NFCC#8. The first sample illustrates his lo-fi sound, the second sample illustrates his more professional sound, neither of which can be done with text. The choice to use "Among Dreams" was arbitrary but virtually any track from his early cassettes would have been valid for the sourced claim ("drums simulated with mouth").--Ilovetopaint (talk) 02:02, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Pass czar 02:58, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ariel_Pink/GA1&oldid=829084445"