# Talk:Oh My God, Charlie Darwin

This review is transcluded from Talk:Oh My God, Charlie Darwin/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: David Fuchs (talk · contribs) 17:02, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 Doing... Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 17:02, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
Overall the article's in pretty solid shape. I'd never heard of the Low Anthem before, so it was an informative read. Comments wrt to meeting criteria below:

Prose:
After the album's release, the Low Anthem embarked on a tour of the United States from 2008, and added Canada and Europe to its touring roster in 2009, followed by their first North American headline tour in 2010.  The structure of this is pretty weird and a bit hard to parse; for the lead, is there any reason you can't say they started touring in 2008 across the US, Canada, and Europe through 2010 or similar?
The Wiki entry for Americana (music) says it's also known as American roots music and I'd say that would be a better way to introduce the genre, given that Americana has a number of alternate meanings.
 they taped the word timshel, featured prominently in East of Eden, above the control booth. Uh, where's this control booth? It's already been mentioned in the lead they recorded this at home, and it's kind of odd to me this gets thrown here paragraphs before the actual recording.
They created a temporary studio at home, so it seems logical that they'd have some kind of "control booth". This is also sourced directly from the band. ☔
The second paragraph repeats itself a lot. We get multiple statements that Miller considered ideas in competition like genes.
There's places throughout where I think the text is going beyond fact into opinion with Wikipedia's voice, e.g. the human requirement of comfort and the bleak theory of Darwinism who says humans require comfort? Who calls Darwin's theories bleak? While Oh My God, Charlie Darwin is largely recognized as Americana the "recognized" implies it is Americana and people recognized it as such (and intimates the other genres aren't valid); 
While What the Crow Brings focused on quiet Americana, Oh My God, Charlie Darwin added some variation such as rock and roll, which Miller felt allowed a more consistent theme I feel like this needs some better explanation or restating, because on its face I'm not sure how "we used a more varied musical influence allows more consistency".
To record the album, the band and some friends traveled by ferry to Block Island, Rhode Island, where they transformed the basement of Miller's parents' house into a temporary recording studio while they were away; This sentence goes on way too long and loses itself in complexity (I assume the people away are Millers' parents, but you've got multiple "they"s in that section and it's unclear.
which Miller felt lent a utopian atmosphere that suited the album, leading to friction and tension and resulting in better music not sure how tension and friction between people equals a utopian atmosphere? 
it has been compared to the antediluvian period I don't know what this means. The music is compared to biblical myth? 
Miller sings in falsetto in "Charlie Darwin"[16][41][42] and modal voice in "To Ohio" and "Ticket Taker", before dropping to a "growling low" by "The Horizon is a Beltway" who says it drops to a "growling low"?
The "Music and lyrics" section feels a bit haphazard and unfocused. We get details about Miller's singing in multiple songs, before returning to talk about "Charlie Darwin", then talking about "To Ohio", then a bunch of random tracks, then at the end we get general thoughts about the track listing again and personnel credits, which don't feel like they belong here or at least smushed in the end, since it's general recording info. Likewise I think some of the critic comments are better served in the reception section. 
Likewise the critical reception section seems scattershot. It starts with general comments, which works fine, but I couldn't figure out what the topic of the subsequent paragraphs actually was. The second paragraph, for instance, starts with talking about the album variety, but then you talk about vocals, then production value. 
Tom Jones released a cover of "Charlie Darwin" in his 2012 album Spirit in the Room,[74] and the original song was featured in the conclusion of "Charlie Darwin", the third episode of Rectify's second season on July 3, 2014. what does this have to do with the 2008-2009 release and promotion of the album?
This line remains marooned. 19:42, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
It seems like the most appropriate placement possible to me, alongside other uses of the song in other media. While not traditional "promotion" (i.e., advertising), I still think it fits, and I'm not sure where else would be more appropriate. ☔
If it doesn't fit elsewhere I'd say it doesn't belong in the article. It's essentially trivia that the song appeared, years after the fact, in some shows. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 15:19, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
I disagree. Only one show is mentioned, and it's more than just an appearance; the episode was named after the song. Several other songs from the album appeared in other shows but they're not included. That being said, I think the information is more appropriate in Release, so I've moved it. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 23:03, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
That's at least a better place of putting it. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 18:00, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Media:
File:Charles Darwin photograph by Julia Margaret Cameron, 1868.jpg would be better replaced by an image facing the text per MOS:PORTRAIT, e.g. File:1878 Darwin photo by Leonard from Woodall 1884.jpg or similar. Likewise File:The Low Anthem at the Cluny 2 in Newcastle 8-September-2009.jpg is facing away from the text.
File:The Low Anthem - Charlie Darwin.ogg appropriately tagged, I think justifies its fair use inclusion per WP:NFCC.
References:
Got a bunch of inconsistent formatting in the refs. If you're leaving publishers off and just using work, do that (right now you have some with, some without.) Some websites are italicized in the refs, some aren't (they are in the article body.)
Refs look acceptable wrt reliability.
Spotchecked statements attributed to current refs 3, 5, 7, 12, 15, 16, 19, 26, 3, 39, 46, 52, 60, 69, 72, 77, 88, 93, 96, 100, 106, 110, 120, 126, and 132.
Ref 69 is used for a release date, but if possible it would be better to have a source post-release since dates slip, etc. Same goes with ref 93 and similar about tour dates.
--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 22:00, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

@David Fuchs: Thanks for the review. I've gone through and addressed most of your concerns. I'd appreciate if you could identify specific refs with inconsistent formatting as I'm unable to spot any that require changing. Please let me know if you have any more concerns. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 02:00, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Citations like 40 and 43 have publisher information, but not 42 (Under the Radar) or 70 (The Guardian) or 73 (Magnet) for example. Unitalicized web sites are nyDecentMusic?) and 133 (Woxy). Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 17:33, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
@David Fuchs: Under the Radar and Magnet are independent websites, and The Guardian's publisher is excluded per the template documentation (usually by Citation bot). As for italics, WOXY is a radio station and AnyDecentMusic? is seemingly unitalicised everywhere else on Wikipedia. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 22:33, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
I will give the article another once-over and then pass or circle back. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 18:00, 24 August 2023 (UTC)