Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Christ Illusion

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 05:45, 9 March 2007.

Christ Illusion

This is an article concerning a music album that has been improved to GA, and after further improvement from many other gracious editors, I feel is now ready for FAC given the fact it has been sufficiently expanded per the sources currently available on the article topic. My thanks to all those that have contributed, who's help has been greatly appreciated (can any of those contributors who wish to comment on this FAC and / or vote please make the fact clear they've been contributors to the article when commenting / voting?.. thanks). If there's any concerns as relates the article not meeting a specific part of FA criteria, can they please be specific in what they feel needs addressing and I'll get onto addressing them asap. My thanks to all FAC reviewers in advance, and I hope the article is of joy. LuciferMorgan 23:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support — as a light contributor to the article's prose, I must say the article is in good shape. I might give it another read to weed out anything remaining, but it's good. — Deckill er 01:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! LuciferMorgan 01:48, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support The article is very well sourced and well written. The images and audio files make an important contribution and have valid fair use rationales. Good job! Jay32183 02:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support :) LuciferMorgan 03:00, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support The intro needs to be expanded and the prose seemed too X happened then Y happened... but overall a pretty solid article.Balloonman 04:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support. The reason why the intro is the size it is is because I don't wish for it to grow out of control in proportion to the article's size. LuciferMorgan 10:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support. An excellent article on an excellent album. A few minor issues though:

*An external link label shouldn't be the name of the website itself ("ChristIllusion.com" > "Official website of the album").

*...the album recieved mixed critical reviews - Spelling.

*"Whilst" > "While".

*"Its June 23 European release saw the EP land at number 48 on the Swedish charts,..." - Reword. No need in a comma.

Some chart positions lack a reference, but you may cover all of them with this.

Citation 37 at the end of the sentence covers the ones not cited in the middle of the actual sentence - I did cite each chart position first of all, but 37 was duplicated a few times in one sentence which was criticised at peer review, hence the change. If I need to re-add them, I will using the Blabbermouth source, though as a former staff member of Rockdetector I won't use them due to reliability issues - they are notorious for making typos. LuciferMorgan 14:00, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Use {{cite news}} on news references (Blabbermouth.net).

I don't class Blabbermouth.net as a news reference - news is like CNN on TV etc. as far as I'm concerned, and Blabbermouth.net is a web source, thus why they have CD reviews.

Although Blabbermouth isn't entirely a news source, most of the references are to news archives. Michaelas10 (Talk) 16:05, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's true, though I prefer using {{citeweb}} - I don't think there's currently a policy on cites, long as they're used in a consistent style, have retrieval dates, author, source etc. LuciferMorgan 16:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*In paticular the cover art - Spelling. Michaelas10 (Talk) 16:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get onto these very shortly... LuciferMorgan 01:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks for your comments and support Michaelas10, which are greatly appreciated. Any suggestions on improving an article are always warmly welcomed. LuciferMorgan 14:00, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I have done some very minor copyediting work on this article a couple of weeks back, but feel sufficiently neutral to be able to say that this is an example of exactly the sort of well-written, well-referenced article Wikipedia's coverage of popular music is all-too-sorely lacking in. Angmering 18:12, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.