# Talk:Afrique Victime

I created this article as a stub with basic information to be added on. If you'd like to help expand it, here are some ideas:

Chart performance - I've tried, and I don't know where to find this information.
Personnel - haven't found a reliable source yet.
Album ratings infobox
Description of album content and style
Riverhugger (talk) 07:20, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Afrique Victime/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: TheNuggeteer (talk · contribs) 04:48, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: PerfectSoundWhatever (talk · contribs) 16:26, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Sorry User:TheNuggeteer, but this article is a long way from meeting the GA criteria, so I would have to quickfail it. It fails GA criterion #3, due to not being broad in its coverage. Almost all sections are undeveloped, and sources clearly exist to build out these sections. Here are a few points if you still seek to bring this article to GA:

There is no information on when/how the album was recorded, and what happened during the writing process.  Done (needs checking)
There is no information on any of the songs, how they are structured, how they sound, what instruments they use, what genres they are. Done (needs checking)
The rock/blues/assouf part is unsourced (big no-no for genres, see WP:GWAR) and is inexplicably under "track listing"  Done
Reception is three sentences despite there being ~10 full length reviews in reputable publications.  Done
Personnel list is unsourced  Done
Reception should be higher than charts. You can use the ordering of the headers in MOS:ALBUM as a guide.  Done
Information about their touring would be useful. As well, a section on the release.  Done (needs checking)
The album's title should not be bolded in "Background"; it is already bolded in the lead.  Done
Should be more information about the "companion documentary"  Done
Why is there a header2 "Afrique Victime" under "Meaning"? No reason to make a subsection when its the only thing in the parent section. Done
Discuss themes, political context, etc. in more depth.  Done (needs checking)
"Sexism" should not be capitalized Done
Other than the metacritic sentence being gramatically poor, "a popular song/album reviewer" is incorrect. Metacritic is a review aggregator, not a review site itself. Also, I think that the ranking was referring to user scores. (I'm not sure we use that)  Done
The infobox gives a recording location of "Niamey, Niger", but the prose gives many others. Keep in mind we usually only use allmusic's prose, not database entries.  Done
Add accompanying images to help illustrate the text. See Windswept Adan or It Was Hot, We Stayed in the Water for example articles.  Done
Quick spotcheck
from this version.

ref 4: only has the rating. all good.  Done
ref 9: this is a duplicate ref with [1]. references check out.  Done
ref 17: all good. If you use this for prose, (which you should) add the author (Allison Hussey)  Done
ref 31: just a chart, all good  Done
ref 34: another chart, all good  Done
I would recommend for you to read other album GAs/FAs to get an idea of the level of quality required for these articles. Short album GAs are very rare, because I find that music publications tend to write longer articles, and usually there are interviews to be found.  For example, I wrote an album GA on an album with essentially only 3 reviews (Don't Wake Me Up) and I still was able to write out each section into a good paragraph and cover all the broad points. If you are intending to continue improving this article, please feel free to message me on my talk page, as I have decent experience writing album articles. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 16:26, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@PerfectSoundWhatever: Do you think an interview by Reverb would fix the recording process problem? I've heard that interviews are sometimes not reliable. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 23:34, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Note: I added it anyway, be free to revert it. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 23:58, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
The Reverb page should be fine. The Reception section should be above track listing and personnel. The T in the Touring header should be uncapitalized.
Keep in mind: When I said the article lacks information on X, I mean a comprehensive, well-researched paragraph should be included, not a couple of sentences. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 01:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
User:PerfectSoundWhatever, I saw the review here before I saw the article, and I agree with you completely. I'm going to make some MOS edits. BTW I saw them last month here in Birmingham: great show. Drmies (talk) 01:53, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
@PerfectSoundWhatever: I want to ask what you mean by WP:ALLMUSIC, and "Keep in mind we usually only use allmusic's prose, not database entries." And I also finished the part about the songs, could you check it out? 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 09:47, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
You should generally only use AllMusic's prose entries. That means the written text under "AllMusic Review". — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 17:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for the response, I removed the database parts. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 10:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
@PerfectSoundWhatever: and @Drmies: Finished with everything, just needs some checks, then I will start another nomination. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 11:29, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
@Drmies @PerfectSoundWhatever Re-tagging. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 10:13, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Please don't. The paragraph I just removed is full of problems. Besides capitalization and writing, the four quotes are not actually in the article used to verify it, and the audience spoken of here wasn't reacting to the album, but to the band testing out material for the album. Pinging User:PerfectSoundWhatever. Drmies (talk) 13:37, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Just asking, do you think there are more problems? 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 13:39, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
The real problem is that you wrote that and stuck it in there. Someone who makes up four quotes, and totally misreads the reference (this is the second time), probably shouldn't be submitting and reviewing for GA. Drmies (talk) 14:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 I agree with Drmies; the article is still far from GA. The sections are too short, and the prose/grammar is poor. One example of the former, the reception section should have the reviewers thoughts summarized into 1-2 sentences, not just the score. There are many capitalization errors: "Rock", "Motorcycle gangs", and "War crimes". You should be constantly comparing against passed GAs and FAs and look for the differences in paragraph structure, length, sourcing, and prose quality.
I don't think you have a grasp of what is required for a GA. I'm not sure you should continue attempting to nominate them. Your nominations are 5 fails (incl. 3 quickfails) and 0 passes. There are many other areas you can positively improve the wiki. If you still want to try to nominate them, I would suggest for you to carefully read through all of WP:GACR and Wikipedia:Nominating good articles. Read many other GAs and FAs and get a sense of the quality required. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 16:56, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

I requested copyediting by the Guild of Copyeditors to fix the issue with the grammar, as you can see in the talk page, I'm trying to expand the article so every section can be, hopefully, developed. I myself have reviewed an article.
Thanks,  🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 06:37, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Do you think I should nominate after I put all the sources? All the problems might land the article on hold (probably), what do you think? 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 05:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
No. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 05:43, 24 July 2024 (UTC)