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

Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 12:07, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   I'm more curious than anything, "Here comes the Naz" - what was that supposed to mean? Is Naz slang for something? Can this be clarified or even wikilinked?

"Here comes the Naz" was a line from a well-known sketch by hipster comic Lord Buckley - "the Naz" meaning Jesus - which is probably its derivation here - but I have no source for that. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:27, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ghmyrtle is spot on and it's in Hanson's book, so I've added it as a footnote. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:15, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1. Is there any particular reason why Leoš Janáček is piped to Janáček (same story with Antonín Dvořák), and why "Sinfonietta" isn't wikilinked to Sinfonietta (Janáček)? "Sinfonietta" just in brackets isn't particularly helpful to people unfamiliar with this artist. As in I wasn't clear that that was were the extract was from by how you've worded the article, I was confused and clicked on the artist link to understand what that meant.

I've redone the links Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1. Why is America wikilinked in the fourth paragraph of the "Early career" sub-section, when the terms America and US both appear prior to this?

Probably something another editor did that I forgot to fix. Per WP:OVERLINK this shouldn't be in there. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1. "which by all accounts was a disaster" - can exactly what made this a disaster be clarified in any useful way to the reader?

Clarified a bit. Apparently the equipment was all third rate, such as running the PA from a single broken plug in a shed. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1. "In 1969, Emerson performed as a session player for" - up to you, but I don't see any need for this to be a one sentence paragraph. Do you think you can merge it with either the above or below paragraphs?

I think I can - have a look now Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1. "from a brain tumour aged 65" - consider rewording, as it kind of makes it sound like that's how old his tumour was.

Reworded Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1. B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   70% of your citations are to Hanson, which I don't think is ideal, but i'm guessing that's the only book that focuses entirely on the band, and many other reliable sources are used, so I think this is acceptable.

Yes, I've been a little uncomfortable myself, but as you speculate, this is the only officially authorised biography of the band. It drew on back issues of NME and Melody Maker that are now hard to find and featured fresh interviews from everyone except Keith Emerson. It achieved good reviews and received praise for finally filling gaps in the narrative. More info here. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1. I've been told during several reviews that if you have a both a 'Notes' and 'Bibliography' section, all books should be placed in the bibliography, even if they are only used once. I'm not sure if there is an official guideline on this, so i'm not going to make you do it, but just something to keep in mind. Feel free to let me know if there is a guideline on this that you know about.

I don't think there is but it's something I've got into the habit of doing recently, so I've ((sfn))'ed all these. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1. B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

2. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

3. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

4. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

5. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

6. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: Placing on hold until minor points are addressed. Freikorp (talk) 12:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Freikorp: - I think all the issues have been addressed, can you take another look? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:15, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Well done. Passing. Freikorp (talk) 23:46, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]