# Talk:Jesus Hits Like the Atom Bomb

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jesus Hits Like the Atom Bomb/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 22:37, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

 
I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 22:37, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
Earwig finds no issues.  The album cover image has an appropriate fair use.

The poster is verified on Commons as having been posted with the given license, but not verified for copyright status.  As far as I can tell, per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Canada, it's under copyright still in Canada, and per Commons:Hirtle chart it's under copyright in the US too, in that case.  If that's right, we need it to be re-uploaded locally and given a fair-use rationale.  I'm by no means an image expert, so if you like I can get another opinion on this.
not entirely sure about the status of the poster. since i do understand that the author (Montreal Concert Archive) released poster unto flickr as public domain, this would fall under {{PD-user}} for the United States. however Canada copyright law is unclear on whether if the author chooses to release under public doman, that it still is. an expert may be neccesary (chch)
What makes the following reliable sources?
styxworld.com -- it looks like the band's official site, but you're citing a blog. (omitted)
Velocity magazine. Per WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT I think you should cite trippingdaisy.com for this, but we still need to know that the magazine is a reliable source. (have stated "via trippingdaisy.com" and deleted a duplicate cite)
Would the Velocity interview, stemming from tripping daisy's official website, qualify as as an authentic interview (verified by the band themselves)? if you understand what i mean
I think so.  Since they posted the interview, they stand by what it says.  After thinking about it some more I'm going to strike this.  I'm not sure if it would be better to cut the reference to the magazine completely and just make it a web citation, but it doesn't matter for GA. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 17:53, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
I assumed trippingdaisy.com was the band's official site and so could be treated as reliable for most purposes, but daisynews.com also looks official.  Which is the official band site?  And what makes the other reliable?
ink19.com (omitted)
centraltrack.com (omitted)
re FN 31, what is a tray card? (av media: cd liners)
I'll pause the review until these are resolved. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 02:08, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Although I can't fix the issues you point out at this second (it is very late here) I can address what some things you've said (which i'll fix in the morning when i wake up);
i'll do some looking on the poster copyright and come back to it. if it has to be removed, welp so be it. again, i;ll check.
Styxworld isn't: 1. the band's website and 2. a neccessary citation, that was there for extra reference on how Tripping Daisy/Def Leppard 1996 tour was received, but the "Getting the Business" ref and the Def Leppard Rolling Stone ref do an adequate enough job. It can be omitted.
We can omit "ink 19" since it's only used once, and the point the citation was placed at was better explained by its other sources.
again: central track can be omitted for same reason as above.
Regarding websites: "trippingdaisy.com", "daisynews.com" and "pinkjelly.com" are definitely official, as they are all listed in the CD liner notes for Jesus Hits Like the Atom Bomb. The band may have decided to split their various operations around various websites at the time (the Jesus liner notes also reference "luretour.com", "deadflymerch.com" and "daisyradio.com"), hence the odd multitude of official Tripping Daisy websites.
i believe the Velocity Magazine ref has a "via trippingdaisy.com" attatched. Also noted a duplicate ref, which i will fix.
Sonic Bloom "tray card" was meant as is; but yeahhhhhhh thats not how cite av media notes work. i do understand them a bit better now so it'd get changed into "cd liners" instead, along those lines. it's not av media notes, it's just av media
Thanks. Chchcheckit (talk) 02:49, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
No hurry -- so long as I know you're working on it there's no great rush.  I've struck a couple of the points above based on your replies, and will take another look when you've made the edits you mention above. By the way, it's usually easier in these reviews to reply threaded in the bullet points -- makes it easier for us both to see what's been dealt with and what hasn't.  Not obligatory, just FYI. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 10:59, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Alright, i've checked several things off. There have also been a few touchups and new citations which i stumbled upon, although they don't add much extra to the article as it is. Also sorry i meant
{{PD-author}}
with the poster.

Chchcheckit (talk) 17:06, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi -- thanks for the responses; I'm about to ping Nikkimaria, who is very knowledgeable about images, to get a second opinion; then I'll go through the other points and see what's left and then go on with the review. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 17:47, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Nikki, do you have a minute to take a look at File:Tripping Daisy.jpg?  If I understand the bot comment on Commons correctly, it's saying that the Flickr post did have the PD grant, but that that doesn't mean the person who posted it had the right to make it PD, so it's not clear what the status is. It's Canadian, anonymous, and never published in the US, so since it was published in 1998 I think that makes it under copyright in Canada per this page.  Is that right?  Thanks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 17:47, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Assuming the uploader was not the copyright holder, correct, it would still be under copyright. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:00, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, Nikki.  Chchcheckit, that means that if you think you can create a valid FUR you should upload the file to enwiki, rather than using the Commons file.  If you don't think there's a good rationale possible for fair use, I would just delete the image.  I'm going to nominate the file for deletion on Commons. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 11:06, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
poster has been omitted Chchcheckit (talk) 14:17, 14 May 2023 (UTC)


### Content review
Chchcheckit, everything is now struck above except the image question, and with luck Nikki will have time to help us resolve that.  I'll go ahead with more review comments below.  One procedural comment: in reviews like this it's best to let the reviewer strike items as they are resolved, rather than striking them yourself, just because otherwise the reviewer has a hard time figuring out what they've verified.  If you let me strike the issues, then I know they're struck because I've checked them and I still need to check whatever is unstruck.  Anyway, on with the review:

"reaching number 95 on the band's native Billboard 200 chart": I don't what is meant by either "band" or "native" here; couldn't this just be "reaching number 95 on the Billboard 200 chart"?  Or are there multiple Billboard 200 charts?
"Feldman offered Tripping Daisy an unprecedented amount of creative freedom during the recording": unprecedented for Feldman?  Or for the band?
I think the "Critical reception" section needs a bit of work.  Take a look at WP:RECEPTION; you have the "A said B" problem, to some extent, and that essay gives some advice on how to address it.
That's everything; the writing is pretty good throughout.  Once these are addressed I'll do some spotchecks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 18:39, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

"reaching number 95 on the band's native Billboard 200 chart": I don't what is meant by either "band" or "native" here; couldn't this just be "reaching number 95 on the Billboard 200 chart"?  Or are there multiple Billboard 200 charts? ("US Billboard 200")
"Feldman offered Tripping Daisy an unprecedented amount of creative freedom during the recording": unprecedented for Feldman?  Or for the band? (adjusted)
I think the "Critical reception" section needs a bit of work.  Take a look at WP:RECEPTION; you have the "A said B" problem, to some extent, and that essay gives some advice on how to address it. (done.)
Chchcheckit (talk) 18:46, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Okay, done. Chchcheckit (talk) 19:23, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
also sorry i didnt read that strikeout thing my bad  Chchcheckit (talk) 19:25, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
I re-read the "unprecedented" line and I think it's clear enough.  The changes you made to the reception section are an improvement; I think more could be done but this is good enough for GA. I'll do spotchecks next.  And see my note about the poster in the section above; that does need to be dealt with. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 11:06, 14 May 2023 (UTC)


### Spotchecks
Footnote numbers refer to this version.

FN 3 cites "While working on music, DeLaughter met guitarist and trumpeter Phil Karnats; the two connected musically and began working on a side project called The Platinum Experience, with DeLaughter on drums and Karnats on guitar."  Verified.
FNs 18 & 25 cite "and his use of reverb and distortion effects on his vocals drew comparisons to Brainiac": mostly verified; reverb and distortion are both in the sources, but the one that mentions Brainiac only mentions distortion.
FN 43 "Around a month before the album's release, Island's parent company PolyGram was purchased by the beverage giant Seagram for US$10.6 billion."  Verified.
FN 47 cites "After the tour's conclusion, the band returned to the studio to commence work on a new extended play, The Tops Off Our Head."  The source describes the album but doesn't give these details.
FN 52 cites "Despite its commercial failure, Jesus Hits Like the Atom Bomb was "one of the most acclaimed albums of 1998", according to MTV News." Verified.
-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 12:07, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

FN 18 & 25: brainiac reference is omitted
FN 47: i don't really know how to draw the dots between tripping daisy going into the studio for demos and the ep, so i've stated something about demos for a new album instead.
Also I'm cool removing the poster because it exists there purely for flair and my slight discomfort with it being a wall of text. but that's a personal thing, and i can and will concede
Chchcheckit (talk) 14:16, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
OK.  I checked a couple more, since we had to make some changes:

FN 56 cites "In November 2003, CMJ New Music Report awarded the album a "Silver Salute", calling it a "classic College Radio album"."  Verified.
FN 3 cites "The decision to release "Waited a Light Year" as a single was seen as a risky move for the band due to its six-minute runtime—although a four-minute radio edit was also provided—and the fact there were more accessible songs on the album." Verified.
FN 5 cites "The album was originally titled Guts but the title was changed after it was discovered fellow Island Records artist John Cale had released a compilation album under that name in 1977."  Verified.
All good.  The image is removed too, which was the last issue, so I'm passing this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 14:22, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much for taking the time to do this :)))))) Chchcheckit (talk) 14:23, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Tripping Daisy.jpg
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:23, 14 May 2023 (UTC)