User talk:Rafablu88

Good article reviews

Thank you very much for reviewing the 2008 German Grand Prix, and passing it for Good article status! I have been the main editor of the article. Darth Newdar (talk) 16:45, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Cheers. If you nominate other F1 articles, just drop a line and I'll review them for you promptly. Rafablu88 (talk) 18:21, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I have recently put the 2008 Turkish Grand Prix up as a GAN. I'm leaving you this message as you said (after reviewing the 2008 German Grand Prix) that any other F1 GANs you would be happy to review. If you're not interested, don't worry; there's no rush, as I'm going to sort out the 2008 French Grand Prix. Just have a look at the page to see what I mean :) Darth Newdar (talk) 13:13, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Request and reminder

Hi Rafablu. First off, I wanted to say thank you for your in-depth and hands-on review of 21st Century Breakdown. It was much appreciated. On that note, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind giving some advice on getting the article to FA, since you've gone through the process already. Also, I wanted to remind you not to forget to list GA nominees you've passed at WP:GA. I've already listed 21st Century Breakdown. Thanks. Timmeh 20:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch. I'll address those issues in the article, and I'll try to remember to get a peer review done in November or December. Timmeh 21:48, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

No probs. I'll keep an eye on it in the meantime. Rafablu88 21:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Intimacy FAC

I find the closing a bit odd, since my comments were in the process of being addressed and another editor was about to review. I suggest talking to the FAC director and asking if it can be relisted. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:48, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

In general you should hew closer to the sources you are citing. You seemed to miss a lot of essential details from articles you cited when just summarizing (one that pops to mind was Kele explaining why they were doing little press), and it also occasionally caused problems when there was a disconnect between what was written in the article and what was was actually in the source cited. It's something you should work on with all your articles. I'll review some more of the page later. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:06, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar :)

And good work yourself on pumping out so many worthy Bloc Party FAs and GAs is a relatively small amount of time! --Brandt Luke Zorn (talk) 01:33, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

A Weekend in the City

I was mostly joking, I'm sure it's fine! Any reason the article wasn't in Category:Bloc Party albums? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:05, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I saw the FAC. Regrettably, I really don't have time to tweak the prose much, but I'll see if I can do any small cleanups. Dabomb87 (talk)

Erm... sure. I wasn't aware of any problem. Have you had any complaints about specific constructions? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:26, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, but were there any specific examples? I seriously don't see any problem with this particular construction, and I'm wondering whether reviewers didn't object to some other "-ing" issues. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:34, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Heh. That's what makes the article become some of Wikipedia's finest work :) Either way, reviewers should be anal; it's part of their "job description". Beats having lazy supporters any day... Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:40, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, you can't make other people develop a sense of humor—best to develo a thick skin to unconstructive criticism and take it in stride. Was there any issue with my other edits to this section? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:42, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

No worries. Don't forget to use edit summaries, by the way. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:49, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Question: what in the name of God is meant by "MTV Base-inspired beats" (in the "Composition" section)? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:59, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Also, in "Lyrics", The track castigates right-wing newspapers for propounding a hysterical fear of black youths in hoodies, an action which often leads to opportunities being denied to the Black British community at large. Something tells me you're a bit too close to the source wording here. "Propound" also sounds somewhat ambiguous here; is it used by McLean? I'd think "perpetuate" would be more appropriate. If the source doesn't use "propounding", then we are suggesting that right-wing newspapers actually propose or set forth such ideas that were not really part of the British collective unconscious. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:14, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, nice work trimming the article. In "Lyrics", Several songs detail the drug and drink culture present in a metropolis after Okereke read Guy Debord's The Society of the Spectacle and Henri Lefebvre's Critique of Everyday Life, works which analyse how people experience leisure in modern societies needs some serious clarification. I presume that Okereke read the books and was then inspired to write songs on the drug and drink culture of major cities? Try rephrasing the sentence to make it simpler, shorter, and clearer. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:43, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

The prose could probably still be tweaked throughout the article, but I've done all I can (improvements, I hope). As an aside, you may want to consider whether you really need File:BPGLodge.jpg. Keeping it at a resolution low enough to satisty WP:NFCC makes it too tiny for its intended purpose. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:50, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

I think a larger version would be perfectly acceptable, but that's not the problem; the problem (in my view, let's pretend I'm reviewing the article) is WP:NFCC#8: would omission of the image really "be detrimental to [...] understanding" of the content? Do you think that the image is necessary to show the studio set-up? (I'm neither supporting nor opposing use of the image, just sort of playing devil's advocate. I hope you see where I'm coming from.) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:01, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

No need to thank me. Good luck with FAC :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:02, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

All right, I'm sold, but then you should upload a larger version (not much larger, of course; just enough for the setup to be clear). Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:15, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Much better. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:16, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, I didn't really look at images, sources etc. so I can only comment on the prose now. I can read the article in more depth and leave my !vote later. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:31, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

By the way, I don't think you have to use non-breaking spaces for dates. I never do, and WP:MOSNUM has no say on the matter, but you may want to get in touch with someone more knowledgeable just to make sure. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:37, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Cool. I'll go over the article one more time and see if I can catch any glitches I overlooked. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:50, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

You could reword All songs follow track 11 after a silent three minute pregap to When present, bonus tracks follow... etc. Also, question: are there any bonus tracks on the global re-release? If so, you should reword ...follow track 11 after a silent three minute pregap to ...follow "SRXT" after a silent three minute pregap or whatever else works. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:34, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Right, thanks; much better! I told you you'd have trouble with that screenshot—it is a rather tenuous claim. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:02, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, I think all my concerns are resolved. A bold suggestion: what do you think of reorganizing the "Critical" section like so? It seems somewhat more logical to me (overall reception → positive → negative), but I don't know if there's any sort of standard for critical reception sections in album articles. Just tell me what you think. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:52, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure, no problem; it was just an idea. Wouldn't you rather replace the IGN Music review in the infobox with one from a more established publication? IGN is certainly notable (and reliable), but it isn't particularly well-known for its music criticism. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:07, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Excellent. I like seeing reviews from all over the Anglophone world—what, nothing Aussie or South African? (seriously, just yanking your chain...) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:26, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes, I may have forgotten to add my support... One last pass:

1. You may want to go over the whole thing to make sure no U.S. English has crept into the article :)
2. The band recorded around 30 sound checks for the initial lyrics on a MiniDisc player—how do you record something on a player?
3. In "Composition", The songs are constructed with a high level of technical proficiency sounds a bit off to me. Do you mean they are complex songs, that the actual composition process required a high level of proficiency, or that as composed, the songs require a high ltvel of technical proficiency to perform?
4. Check the link to drum and bass in "Composition". You're not talking about the genre, are you?

That's it from me. Good luck; here's hoping I'll see that little bronze star in a few days. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:02, 11 September 2009 (UTC)