Talk:Richard D. James Album

B-class

How much work does this article need to reach B-class? I can't find any reliable sources about copies sold, background or release. – electricController 15:48, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

To get it to be B-class, I would suggest posting the album at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and note you are looking for a B-class review, someone will take a peak at it from there. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:51, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

@Andrzejbanas: Thank you. – electricController 18:07, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Not a problem. Great work on taking a step forward on this article. I think its looking fairly good but I'd suggest we combine the smaller sections unless you think they will be expanded further. Sections that are only one paragraph or less long usually look "unfinished" even if its all the information we can get. I often combine "release and reception" sections if the albums I review don't really chart or get re-released or whatever. Might be an idea here, but no real pressure. Great work! Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:10, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Great suggestion. – electricController 18:11, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Richard D. James Album/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: LunaEclipse (talk · contribs) 00:14, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Chchcheckit (talk · contribs) 16:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

I'll get to this pretty soon.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Well-written

• The reception section is good. Currently looking through other parts.
• I feel that the Release section should be rejigged; Music & Media (cited in sales box) notes how it was Warp Records best-selling release at that point with 100,000 copies sold, and this 1997 interview decipts RDJ's suprise at this. Also; the chart information mentioned in the lead should be referenced in the "release section" as well.
• Would it be better to have a "release history" table at the bottom of the article instead of small references to reissues? And then to format it to "release and reception?
• Y no pagenumbers for Kirn 2011? (appears to have been fixed)

Accuracy/Verifiability/Spotchecks

• The "Usage In Media" section mostly appears to be original research (WP:OR) save for the references on "4" and "Girl/Boy Song" which could be better incorporated into the article (i'm still writing so give me a second to explain myself)
• Y Chart info about not charting as high is citing UK charts; WP:OR
  •  Removed 💽 LunaEclipse 💽 ⚧ ^{【=◈︿◈=】} 20:48, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
• earwig copyvio checks out.
• put in the electronic beats article for media whilelisting review, i'll see where that goes but there should be no issues

Broad

• Has points for all relevant areas
• see below: sales milestone is not rlly covered in article as it is (as of september 9 at 1:33pm utc)

NPOV

• pending, reception is good though

Stability

• Appears to be since August 22.

Illustrations/Images

• Artwork and images of plug n Squarepusher are all appropriately rationaled; no problems there.
•  Done "4" audio sample appears to be 10 seconds too long per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Music samples, but it passed review. (states that 10% of song should be used. "4" is 3:37 or 217 seconds long, and 10% of that is 21.7 seconds) Not sure about this one, I'll ponder.

Going through still // Chchcheckit (talk) 14:25, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

@LunaEclipse any comments? Chchcheckit (talk) 11:45, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Tried to come up with a few of my own writing ideas regarding part of the lead and the entire reception section, cause if in lead they should be mentioned in the body of text as well.

Second para of lead:

• Richard D. James Album reached number 62 on the UK Albums Chart and became James' first album to chart in the United States, at number 20 on Billboard's Top Heatseekers Albums chart; by 1997, it had sold 100,000 copies worldwide, becoming Warp's most successful release. It received acclaim from music critics, and has since been described as one of the best albums of 1996 and the 1990s overall by music critics.

Release:

• Richard D. James Album was released through Warp on 4 November 1996.[23] It was released in the United States by Sire Records on 28 January 1997;[24] the American version included the Girl/Boy EP as bonus tracks.[25] The album was released on compact disc, cassette and gramophone record;[26] early copies of the album were distributed with a plastic sachet containing James' hair.[27] On 16 November 1996, The album debuted at number 62 on the UK Albums Chart and number 7 on the UK Dance Albums Chart.[28][29] The album became James' first album to chart in the US, debuting at number 20 on Billboard's Top Heatseekers Albums chart.[24] By late 1997, the album had sold 100,000 copies worldwide, becoming Warp's most successful release.[30] James was suprised by the album's sales figures, calling them "pretty bizzare".[31]
• the "first to chart in the US" is supported by this source

hhh. Chchcheckit (talk) 13:07, 9 September 2024 (UTC)