Wikipedia:Peer review/A Day in the Life/archive2

A Day in the Life

Previous peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I want it to be a GA, and would like some help with what I actually have to do.

Thanks, Cheers, Kodster (Willis) (Look what I can do) 21:56, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

• This article has had an {{in use}} template for over a week, diff. I was going to review it, but won't while it is undergoing a major revision. Sorry, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: There is a lot of material here and it is mostly well written and referenced, which is a very good start. Here are some suggestions to "take a bad song and make it better" (I know, not this song, and this is not bad):

• A model article is useful to follow for structure, ideas, etc Fortunately there are five Beatles FAs and they are all songs, see here.
• The lead needs to be expanded per WP:LEAD and needs to summarize the whole article. My rule of thumb is that if it is a header, it should be at least mentioned in the lead.
  • done
• The article's structure is odd - "Credits" should go at the very end (see the models) and might be better titled Personnel (following the Hey Jude model). The song's inspriation and composition are broken up into several sections, with the Song structure breaking things up in the middle. I can understand perhaps describing the structure so the composition in the studio section is clearer, but it could also be that the problem (missing middle) could be briefly described, then the studio solution, then give the structure as a separate section after all the composition.
  • done
• There is not really a critical reception section - there is information in Recognition on best of lists it made, but what did the critics of the day think of the song? Was it nominated for awards? What chart positions did it reach?
  • done
• I read for comprehension, not to proof reading, but I noticed several typos and MOS issues. Refs come right after punctuation, missing a close quote, missing space between a ref and a following sentence, etc.
  • done
• Put things into context for the reader - the caption on the album cover missing the song does not identify it as being released in SE Asia, for example.
  • done

Hope this helps, you may want to ask another reviewer for feedback at WP:PRV Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 23:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Some quick comments (and I mean quick...

)

• No cover art of anything?
• "For other uses, see A Day in the Life (disambiguation)." - probably not necessary per WP:HAT
• "It was later decided that a partly-improvised crescendo by an orchestra would serve as the bridge. The supposed drug reference in the line "I'd love to turn you on" resulted in the banning of the song by the BBC." - musical content and reception shouldn't be in the same paragraph...
  • done
• [1] - arguably unnecessary use of a fair use image
• A few short paragraphs (especially in reception) could be expanded or merged

Might take a longer look later... dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 11:01, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Comments by IvoShandor I usually go through the body only, because the lead is dependent upon its content. I will go through the lead when you get the article to the point you want it at, if you want me to. Any rewriting or movement of text I did, feel free to reverse of change it.

CE issues and questions, as well as general comments, to follow:

• The date of the Daily Mirror article Lennon read before penning the last verse would be helpful and finish the timeline of Lennon's lyric writing nicely.
  • done
• I moved: Lennon had a problem with the words of the final verse, not being able to think of the word "fill" for the line "Now they know how many holes it takes to fill the Albert Hall". His friend Terry Doran suggested fill to Lennon, and Lennon used it. up to avoid the one sentence paragraph, it seems to fit where I put it.
  • done
• Did the lyrics sell the 2nd time around? That information seems conspicuously missing.
• This sentence: The Beatles began recording this new song, at that point titled "In the Life Of ..." on 19 January 1967. is unclear. I am not quite sure what you are getting at here, so I was unable to fix it.
  • done
• Because the first sentence above isn't clear enough to an average reader the rest of the paragraph is equally as confusing. You can either take a look or explain it to me here and I will try to work with it. I assume you are talking about the "24-bar bridge section" of the song in this paragraph which is mentioned for the first time by that formal name in the next paragraph. I think I know what you are getting at but it's unclear on a first read through. We need to specify what you mean by "this section".
  • I changed it, see if it makes sense.
• editing it out would have been unfeasible in any case, did he say why? Just wondering myself, would make a good addition.
  • No, he did not say. All he mentioned is that he couldn't edit it out.
• no solution for the missing 24-bar middle section of the song, the fact that this section is missing seems to come out of nowhere
  • Are you reading this carefully? Just wondering, because in the first paragraph, it says (and I quote):

At first, The Beatles were not sure how to fill this transition. Thus, at the conclusion of the recording session for the basic tracks, this section solely consisted of a simple repeated piano chord and the voice of assistant Mal Evans counting the bars.

• • It does in fact say that it's missing, if I should reword that, let me know. Cheers, Kodster (Willis) (Look what I can do) 20:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

• Watch the overuse of muscial jargon: 'in the final edit of the song, the orchestral crescendo is reprised in a more cacophonous way after the final verse, probably could be rewritten.
  • done
• Following the final orchestral crescendo, the song ends with one of the most famous final chords in music history. One more source to back up such a bold claim wouldn't hurt here.
• Lennon, McCartney, Starr, Martin, and Evans simultaneously play an E-major chord on three different pianos. Five on three pianos seems odd, might want to get more specific here.
• Might want to consider retitling "The chord" section to something like "Final chord" as the MOS discourages the use of articles in section headings.
• The tone was only inserted on the first 5000 copies of the LP version (save the American Capitol Records pressing), but is now available on all copies of the CD. I dropped a citation needed there.
• The crashing piano chord and 15 kHz tone are interrupted by a loop of incomprehensible Beatles studio background noise, spliced together apparently at random sections some of which would play forward ("Never could be any other way") and others backward (possibly "Will Paul be back as Superman?"). This sentence is unclear. Are you trying to say there are secret messages in the incomprehensible noise? This isn't clear, same as before, you can explain or work on it yourself, I'll be about.
• As I am going through I am wondering if all of the relevant musical terms are linked. Might want to make sure, I haven't done much linking in here, trying to concentrate on the text. Just something to keep in mind.
• With pretty solid referencing throughout I thought it should be noted that this paragraph: This coda to "A Day in the Life," and consequently the Sgt. Pepper's LP, was included in the original British pressings but not in American pressings. Although an infinite loop cannot be created on compact discs, the 1987 CD re-release recreates the effect by looping the noise eight or nine times before fading slowly out., lacks sources.
• I haven't paid attention much either way but I think this article should follow British English, not sure how that works (I'm American).
  • I've had Realist2 look at it, and he uses British English. I'll check again, because I'm American too.
• The "Personnel" section is a pretty bulky list, I am not exactly sure how but you could break it into columns and perhaps make the text small to save space and make the list less daunting to the average wiki-browser.
• For the covers and references, some have years, others don't. They should probably all have years.
• The "Song Structure" section seems very "jargony". Some wikilinks might help a lot here, you may have to search to find the appropriate places. If I get time I will see what I can find.
• I reworded a sentence in the drug references section Like so: Lennon and McCartney denied that there were drug references and publicly complained about the ban at a dinner party celebrating their new album to their manager, Brian Epstein. I thought that was what the sentence was trying to say but if I wrong and they just complained generally and Epstein was just hosting please let me know here and I will fix it.
  • done It's great, thank you.
• The quote from the lyric in this sentence: Martin later commented that he had always suspected that the line "found my way upstairs and had a smoke" was a drug reference, recalling how the Beatles would "disappear and have a little puff", presumably of cannabis, but not in front of him. Earlier it was written as "found my way upstairs". Might want to double check that.
  • done

As I said this is all subject to discussion and/or change. Some of the stuff I didn't really fix I just noted it here, mostly because there are a few things that would better be fixed by you. I will watch the page and help out with any changes you make where I can.

IvoShandor (talk) 16:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Added more and finished my initial copy edit. I will be around to help if you need it. Hope this helps. IvoShandor (talk) 17:07, 22 April 2008 (UTC)