Talk:Vespertine/GA1: Difference between revisions

" the film was awarded the Palme d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival; she received the Best Actress award." the section is heavy on this half-comma-using structure, perhaps exchange it for an 'and'

Fixed

Best Original Song can be linked (Academy Award for Best Original Song) and you should mention that the award is for "I've Seen It All"

Fixed

I'm not sure you can use Bjork.fr as a reference. I know it's reliable but a fansite is not a high-quality source. You should cite NME directly through Template:Cite journal. This problem extends to other refs.

Fixed

I've just read the Sound on Sound ref and it has quite a lot of information, you have an excellent source in your hands (it always was...)

It is indeed! I wish I had found it before I nominated the article. I'll incorporate more of it.

"While living in Copenhagen she" → "While living in Copenhagen, she"

Fixed

I have never seen "aka" in an article, perhaps extend it to also known as

Fixed

"was bored with big beats" → grew tired of "big beats"

Fixed

Can't locate the content ref 15 is supporting.

In the site, "new york experience" links to a mini-site titled "New York Domestika Session", which is dead. Should I remove this content?

The second quote could be paraphrased into something smaller and contained in the previous paragraph.

Fixed

"notes that:" → "notes that,"

Fixed

Composition

"writes:" → "writes," (This extends to other sections, as a quote should be preceded by a comma)

Fixed

Amazon.com isn't a reliable, high-quality source.
"David Fricke of Rolling Stone wrote: "Vespertine is the closest any pop-vocal album has come to the luxuriant Zen of the new minimalist techno". Sentences like this could be, I think, paraphrased because the section already has a lot of quotes. Try doing it for a few.
"the heart of the album" how so?
"In Homogenic Björk usually used one loud beat, but in Vespertine she wanted to make a "microcosmos of thirty or forty beats interacting" This makes it seem like Homogenic is based on one loud beat. Rephrase this.
I don't think live4now is a reliable source.
"Björk has said the song: "is about how two people can create a paradise just by uniting. You've got an emotional location that's mutual. And it's unbreakable. And obviously it's make-believe. So, you could argue that it doesn't exist because it's invisible, but of course it does"." I think this isn't good. For a section on the composition, it's lacking a more analytical characterization of the music. The lyrics are important but the music itself is described in a quite vague manner.
Some of the smaller paragraphs can be combined with the larger ones, in order.

The paragraphs were combined, but a copy edit by the Guild of Copy Editors organised them like that.

Imagery

YouTube can't be used as a source.

I'm having a hard time finding a transcript or an official upload of this press conference. Can I cite it without a link with, for example, Template:Cite conference?

Sony Mini DV camera is too specific and comes across as publicity, especially since it's repeated.

Fixed

"Although now recognised as one of Björk's finest videos" you can't only say this because one critic did so.

Replaced it with: "Although the music video has been well received by critics", and added another source.

I don't think Diffuser.fm is a great source

It is a Townsquare Media site, like Loudwire. I found this other source: Confront Magazine, though it might be even worse.

Pagan Poetry music video" → "Pagan Poetry" music video

Fixed

A lot of Björk refs / primary sources. If you could switch some, it would be great, especially in case you want to eventually make it an FAC.

I switched various Björk refs

The Nicola Dibben quote is just placed there without any introduction.

As an introduction, I wrote: "Academic Nicola Dibben has likened Vespertine's artwork and promotion to representations of the Greek myth of Leda and the Swan, emphazising the erotic overtones of both. She stated:".

Release and promotion

Back it at again with those WP:Primary sources
77island isn't a high-quality source
There should be a separate section for commercial/chart performance, that information shouldn't be here.
"Cocoon" was released as the album's third single on 11 March 2002, its music video having premiered in February" practically the same structure as that of the Hidden Place sentence, try altering it.
You could mention how each single performed on the charts, like on other album articles.

Critical reception

This section seems rather small for the amount of reviews there are. It can be expanded.
Is Almost Cool noteworthy?
In critic's lists (which I think should be critics' lists) what does the 44.5 position mean?
I don't think Fast 'n' Bulbous, E! Online, Audiogalaxy, Playlouder, No Ripcord should be listed.

Charts and certifications

I have never seen a chart table for singles in an album article. I'm going to let it pass, though.

I actually saw it in the article for Debut

References

AllMedia is missing publisher
The Orlando Weekly ref should be in cite news

Lead

remove "winter"

Fixed

E. E. Cummings is correct here, so E.E. Cummings is incorrect in the body of the article

Fixed

The idea that she meant to deviate from the sonority of Homogenic could be incorporated into the second paragraph

Fixed

" and music boxes, the latter were custom made; strings are also heavily featured" I suggest "(...), strings and custom music boxes."

Fixed

"On the album Björk added "microbeats", with the help of the duo Matmos, made from the sampling of shuffling cards, ice being cracked, among other household sounds." → "Assisted by the duo Matmos, Björk created "microbeats" from various household sounds, such as that of shuffling cards and ice being cracked."

Fixed

Overall, this is on the verge of becoming a good article. I absolutely adore this album and think that it deserves an article of the same quality, but some of the prose and the reliance on primary sources are ultimately detrimental. As usual, one week (eligible for extension) on hold; when these issues are fixed, I will do a second review of it. Great work here, Bleff. Pedro u | t 13:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 ===Composition===
 *"writes:" → "writes," (This extends to other sections, as a quote should be preceded by a comma)
+:Fixed
 *Amazon.com isn't a reliable, high-quality source.
 *"David Fricke of Rolling Stone wrote: "Vespertine is the closest any pop-vocal album has come to the luxuriant Zen of the new minimalist techno". Sentences like this could be, I think, paraphrased because the section already has a lot of quotes. Try doing it for a few.
@@ Line 53: / Line 54: @@
 *"Björk has said the song: "is about how two people can create a paradise just by uniting. You've got an emotional location that's mutual. And it's unbreakable. And obviously it's make-believe. So, you could argue that it doesn't exist because it's invisible, but of course it does"." I think this isn't good. For a section on the composition, it's lacking a more analytical characterization of the music. The lyrics are important but the music itself is described in a quite vague manner.
 *Some of the smaller paragraphs can be combined with the larger ones, in order.
+:The paragraphs were combined, but a copy edit by the Guild of Copy Editors organised them like that.
 ===Imagery===
 *YouTube can't be used as a source.