Talk:Otis Redding/GA4

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: TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs) 15:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LEAD
  • At 2012 characters of readable prose, I'd say it is still a little short for a 33355 KB article. I'd like to see the LEAD expanded to much closer to 3000KB.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:28, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not sure what all I would like to see added to LEAD, but one is the The Dock of the Bay posthumous #1, which demonstrates his popularity outside of the US. In fact, I think the lead should mention the charts he was the first posthumous #1 on.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:28, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • I will add this, but I am not sure why you say the lead requires 3000 characters. I would say the lead is a summary with no size limitations.--GoPTCN 10:00, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • There is no requirement. I am suggesting that to properly summarize a normal 33KB article, you usually come closer to 3KB LEAD.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:13, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • I expanded the lead a bit by mentioning his posthumous album and induction into the Songwriters Hall of Fame..--GoPTCN 08:49, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • I remain confused on one issue. "(Sittin' On) The Dock of the Bay" claims in its LEAD that it was the first posthumous #1 in both the US and UK. This article claims it was the first posthumous in the US. You don't state anything about this major fact in the LEAD and should. Can you get it straightened out and added to the LEAD.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:35, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
              • The song topped the US and UK charts, but the album only in the UK, which then became the first posthumous album to reach the #1.--GoPTCN 20:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                • My issue is with the song. There is discrepant info on WP (as stated above).--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:20, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                  • I removed that piece of information that it was the first posthumous song to chart in the top of the UK charts. It actually charted on #3 there, while the album on #1.--GoPTCN 09:21, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                    • O.K. so you fixed "(Sittin' On) The Dock of the Bay" to match here. What about this LEAD? Shouldn't it mention whether this song was the first posthumous #1 single? Does that hold for both the hot 100 and the R&B chart?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:57, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                      • I added that it was the first posthumous single to top the chart in the US.--GoPTCN 12:24, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                        • Properly name and link the charts in the LEAD.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:05, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                          • Billboard Hot 100 is also known as simply "pop", so I just linked the charts.--GoPTCN 10:45, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                            • That is an odd choice. On first use, you are suppose to link a term. Later uses are suppose to be unlinked, but in this case the later uses will not be clearly related to the first use because of the piping choice. I would suggest that you unpipe the links and use the formal name here.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:00, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                              • I am not sure what you mean. Could you be more specific? --GoPTCN 15:39, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                                • You are not suppose to link Billboard Hot 100 everytime it is used in the article. Your just suppose to link it the first time and assume the reader learned what he needed to. The same is true of other charts, song names, album names or any other links. Please spell this chart out correctly the first time and link it. Unlink subsequent uses. Do the same with other charts, song names, album names and any other links.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                                  • Done. Let me know if there are any overlinking problems. --GoPTCN 10:08, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you unlink even the first use of these charts and "Satisfaction"? Also, some of the changes make the grammar incorrect (e.g., "peaked at number 20 on Billboard Hot 100 and at number 85 on Hot R&B." or "former peaked at number 25 on Billboard Hot 100 chart and at number 4 on Hot R&B chart"). In addition, the names you delinked should only include the last name after first use (Franklin, Dunn, etc.).--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:06, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Done the first. I disagree to remove the first name as many won't understand who is meant even if one will read the whole article. It is better to keep it as is. --GoPTCN 13:18, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • What happened to the first link for the album (dock of the bay)? Not so sure it should say of the same name, BTW.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:31, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • The grammar is still off in LEAD and elsewhere. "which became the first posthumous number-one record on both Billboard Hot 100 and R&B charts after his death in a plane crash." needs a the in front of Billboard or a "'s".--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:31, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Added the throughout.--GoPTCN 17:07, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Last thing: Billboard is suppose to be italicized whenever it is mentioned including places like Billboard Hot 100.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:17, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • I was told it was unnecessary since it is a proper noun and thus should be without italicface.--GoPTCN 17:19, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Early life
  • Is Bellevue a town near Macon, a Macon neighborhood, a housing project or what?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:59, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • A neighborhood in Macon. The housing project is Tindall. Done.--GoPTCN 10:00, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Convert all dollar amounts to modern day equivalents. As an example see Bobby Orr.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:59, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is this necessary? I mean, to convert $5 or $25 is a little bit odd.--GoPTCN 10:00, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • I always suggest converting 20th century dollar amounts to help the reader understand what the presented text really means.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:15, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I find this unnecessary but I converted all amounts except the last two in the Wealth section.--GoPTCN 17:50, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is going on with this edit? Also, that edit shows you were using the template incorrectly. Please set it up so that you don't have to update the current year annually (like the example I gave you) and get your coeditors onboard.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:28, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I will contact the editors.--GoPTCN 09:21, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • According to Trekphiler:
  • I know all about price index problems, but the point is not run around inflating things for the component price change of the individual item. That is not a proper thing for an encyclopedia to task itself with doing. General price levels are indicative and certainly better than nothing. It might be better if we could find out what a person makes for doing the same job today, but that is not a tractable thing to do. General price levels do help the reader.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:17, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I reverted and adjusted the template--GoPTCN 10:45, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • We need some sort of acknowledgement from Trekphiler so that there is not an edit war.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:58, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I disagree with putting it in, & I'd be happier if the adjustment was left off, but I'm not inclined to edit war over it. If others are strongly enough in support, I'll leave it.
        • "the point is not run around inflating things for the component price change of the individual item" That leaves me really confused. As said, I'd far rather the comparison be to comparable things. Is there info on weekly/daily wages at the time? (I'd tend to think there is.) So, is there a strong objection to saying, "Redding earned $6 for the gig at Foo (equal to a day's pay for a janitor)"? Or whatever equivalent is apt? If it's not available, so be it; if it is... TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 15:50, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Even labor price indexes would have problems. Movie star salaries, Pro athlete salaries, Congressional salaries and musician salaries have all risen at different rates. A general index that equates general buying power is best.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:21, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Red XNYou are still not using the templates correctly. the 2012 in as of 2012 should use a template so it automatically updates.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:12, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I added the magic word.--GoPTCN 13:22, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Apollo Theater and Otis Blue
Last studio album and Monterey
  • Not sure how I missed that... done--GoPTCN 07:42, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Posthumous releases and proposed recordings
  • Changed the tense--GoPTCN 08:36, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "There had been also a proposal" sounds ungrammatical. Try "Additionally, there had been a proposal" or simply "There had been a proposal".--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:51, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Songwriting
  • "sometimes asked for the Stax member's opinion of the lyric's quality" - Who is the Stax member? A single song's lyrics even are plural as long as they are more than one word. I think it should be lyrics'.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:13, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • He was known to improvise in the last part of a song.--GoPTCN 20:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • either change to "His free improvisation during the song's end was typical" or "He was known to improvise in the last part of a song".--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:32, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Personal life and wealth
  • "One columnist said, "in one year ... he sold more records than Frank Sinatra and Dean Martin combined." - clarify the year.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:18, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry, I fixed the date (1967 now). He was very successful in the last year.--GoPTCN 20:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Awards and honors
  • Songwriters Hall of Fame or Songwriter's Hall of Fame? Link on first instance. Consider adding to an expanded LEAD along with Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. If you want to link to the inductees article don't fool the reader.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:33, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It should be the first. --GoPTCN 08:36, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is linked twice here. It should be in the LEAD and linked there. At most once afterwards. However, you can link to the inductees article.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:33, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Images
  • I hided the image for now.--GoPTCN 08:36, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Although I can not say what the FAC folks will think, this article is very close to meeting WP:WIAGA. I am going to put it on hold. Please continute to respond to the concerns on the subsequent line.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:42, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review. I will try to expand the lead. Regards.--GoPTCN 08:36, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks. First I need the books listed in the further reading section to expand the sections if possible, then I will submit this to FAC :). Regards.--GoPTCN 18:51, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Otis_Redding/GA4&oldid=1125231706"