# Talk:Jerusalem and Dopesmoker

I'm not proposing any specific changes, but wanted to raise a point for consideration. Items in the Notes section refer to items in the References section below them. So as a reader I click what appears to be a reference superscript in the article body, and am directed to an item in the Notes section which for example states only "Bennett" and a page number. I naturally assume that this is a second or subsequent reference to the Bennett source, so I read upwards scanning for the full Bennett citation and find nothing. I would prefer that the first, topmost reference to a source be fully qualified. I don't know if this is standard Wiki practice or something.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.174.139.113 (talk) 05:29, 24 October 2015 (UTC) 

I've combined the older articles about Jerusalem and Dopesmoker. They are generally the same album re-released by a different label with slightly altered around tracks and sound. They have the same production history and I think it's best to combine them into one article. I went ahead on this one by being bold. Any suggestions or oppositions to this? Andrzejbanas (talk) 06:15, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Why does the original cover need a source? Why do the others not? BeastmasterGeneral 13:05, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Read Wikipedia:Uploading images. All images uploaded need a reliable source. This is especially tricky of the one you were suggesting, as it's a bootleg. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:32, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Oh well, I guess this is the kind of stuff that made me stop editing here. It's there if you want it. BeastmasterGeneral 13:50, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Do not be discouraged! We can work it out if we find where it comes from. If the album cover is not being in use on a page, it will be deleted. Let's find a good source and see what we can do. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:59, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
The image came from a scan that I made of the album cover. It is referenced on some blogs and on discogs.com but not much else. It is currently on my userpage so may not get deleted. BeastmasterGeneral 16:29, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jerusalem and Dopesmoker/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Cannibaloki 01:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC)


### Checklist
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality: 

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: 

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources: 

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: 

C. No original research: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects: 

B. Focused: 

Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias: 

Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 

Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: 

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 


### Comments
Some unnecessary [?] quotations here and there, but they are okay to me. I also did a little cleanup in the article, before expanding the reception section. I think the idea of merging the articles was good, because it increased the prose to a resonable size.--Cannibaloki 03:31, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Jerusalem and Dopesmoker/CommentsTalk:Jerusalem and Dopesmoker/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Substituted at 18:03, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jerusalem and Dopesmoker. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080510151431/http://teepeerecords.com/bands/sleep/index.php to http://teepeerecords.com/bands/sleep/index.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:12, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jerusalem and Dopesmoker. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081007161621/http://www.teepeerecords.com/bands/sleep/ to http://www.teepeerecords.com/bands/sleep/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:15, 24 November 2017 (UTC)