Wikipedia:Peer review/L.A.M.F./archive1

L.A.M.F.[edit]

I did a major improvement job on this article but want to solicit opinions before I submit this (again, did so already in a rush late last night in a flush of pride) for FAC status. --Cjmarsicano 14:01, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for starters, how about references? Now it lists only 2, which is not enough. Also, the track list and mucical personel list won't fly in FAC. You need more "meat" to it. Also, the lead is too short. Be careful about wording. Like, for example "plus a few other issues." But at any rate, this is one of the better album articles I have seen :) Renata3 20:12, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. You oughta see some of my other album articles. ; --Cjmarsicano 20:17, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely a good start. I agree it needs some more references, plus a few inline citations (especially if you want to get it featured). Generally, you should insert specific citations for statements of opinions, or figures (such as sales numbers). Additional reviews from established music critics (perhaps in a separate ==Critical Response== section) are also in order. There are also some cases of unencyclopedic writing:

When it came time to mix the recording, various factors proceeded to basically screw everything up for the Heartbreakers. The band bounced from studio to studio, with each member practically making his own mixes for every song.
...but the results, done in just three nights and released by Jungle as L.A.M.F. Revisited, were still not as well received as they should have been.

Those are the most egregrious examples, but the prose has a few more similar (though more minor) problems. Incidently, is the manager's name really spelled with three e's (Leee Black Childers)? - The Catfish 07:21, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Answers, in reverse order: Yes, believe it or not, Childers' name is indeed spelled with three E's. The liner notes of the 2002 CD reissue are consistent in that respect. A quick Google search reveals that he also has his own website/domain name and it also keeps the three-e spelling.

I tried to locate sales figures for the album and was rather unsuccessful. It probably doesn't help matters that, thanks to Track Records going bankrupt at the end of 1977, that there are probably more "reissued" copies and non-English pressings than copies of the original record. So, sales figures are probably a moot point for this particular release, although I don't think it would be out of line to say that the album's reputation (good and bad, if you will) has kept the album alive all these years. I can see where your objection to the second pointed out line comes in - I really should fix that one. That first line... I don't know about changing or dropping it. I think it sets up the rest of the section very well. Besides, I like how it came out. ;) Citations/footnotes/etc. are forthcoming, I just have to play mix and match with the sources already listed and maybe do a little more Googling. --Cjmarsicano 16:04, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"When it came time to mix the recording, various factors proceeded to basically screw everything up for the Heartbreakers"

Looking above the problem is the ". . .basically screw everything up for. . .

That wording needs to be improved, the other parts of the line are just fine.Eagle (talk) (desk)