# Talk:The Black Market (Rise Against album)

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of The Black Market (Rise Against album)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "billboard":
From Billboard 200: Chart Beat Thursday: Eminem, Jason Derulo, Cyndi Lauper Billboard. Retrieved February 20, 2012
From Endgame (Rise Against album): "Endgame - Rise Against". Billboard. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
From Appeal to Reason: "Appeal to Reason - Rise Against". Billboard. Retrieved 2009-05-15. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
From The Sufferer & the Witness: "The Sufferer & the Witness - Rise Against". Billboard. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 04:58, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Black Market (Rise Against album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: CelestialWeevil (talk · contribs) 23:16, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Might as well do this one, too, while the band's on my mind.

Infobox and lead
I see most album articles mention the record label in the lead. It's not imperative, but it's normal.
"revolve around dark subject matter" might be better as "matters" with an S or "around a dark subject matter" if it's a specific one.
"The band members used new recording techniques, such as greater usage" double use of "used" / "usage". You could replace "used" with "employed".
"some critics found the music to be formulaic and stale, while others felt the music was..." I think the second "the music" is unnecessary and would read smoother as "it". "Critics" is also used twice in that sentence; maybe one could be replaced with "reviewers", though it's mostly unnecessary.
"compliment" should be "complement".
An IP added punk rock to the genres recently. I dunno if that's sourced or not below, so I'll leave that to your discretion.
Background and recording
"the band toured in support of the album from two years..." I think "from" should be "for"
"live anywhere' said Blair" To make it sound more formal, I'd remove "said Blair" and put "He said, 'You're constantly..." at the beginning of this quote.
"the other three band members lives had evolved..." members should be members' with a plural possessive apostrophe.
"The band members took a year-long hiatus..." Consider substituting "the band members" with "Rise Against" for the sake of variety in the paragraph.
Beginning of paragraph two, "The band members chose..." I would remove "members", again, just for variety.
"The band tweaked the guitar..." "its guitar" is better than "the guitar", I think.
"This allowed the band to focus more on the creative aspects of recording, as opposed to the technical aspects." Just because "band" is being said so much, I think this sentence would be better as: "This facilitated a greater focus on the creative aspects of recording, rather than just technical ones." This also fixes the repeat of "as opposed" which happens in a few sentences.
"He wanted the growls and broken vocals to remain apparent on The Black Market." this seems redundant, like it's just repeating the previous sentence. But maybe not, your choice, just please review it.
"which he described as "a cathartic experience. So the..." This is tough to explain. You lead into a quote well, making "a cathartic experience" blend with your framing sentence. It would be good if it stopped there. But, because the quote continues despite being framed for one particular grammatical construct, it's confusing for me to read. Maybe end the quote after "Experience" then start a new frame, or make the lead-in frame more generic, like "he said, ..." or something.
" focused on social and political issues." This may need a reference. I couldn't find this mentioned in ref 8 or 9, which are the two nearby ones.
Music and lyrics
Uncapitalize "To" in the title and description of the audio sample to fit with other instances in the article.
I now see the punk rock genre isn't explicitly sourced here. So, either add it and source it, or, more likely, just remove it from the infobox because some IP added it one a whim.
The first mention of The Sufferer & and the Witness should get a year tag (2006). Same with Appeal to Reason.
"Max Qayyum of Punknews" should be "Punknews.org" to fit with their logo and tab tag.
"focus on dark subject matter." Another weird singularity.
"fast guitar section with and heavy bass" I'm not sure what was meant here, but it's definitely a typo.
""I Don't Want to Be Here Anymore" is about resolving to escape from the dark moments in one's life, while pop rock driven "Tragedy + Time" " Because both of these song titles were directly laid out before this, I would change the first one to "the former is about..." and the second to "while the pop rock-driven latter". Also note that "pop rock driven" should be "pop rock-driven".
" Its lyrics advocates..." 'advocate' should be without an "S"
"experimented with the sonics" this could be my lack of knowledge, but I don't know what this means. The wikilink goes to acoustics, which I thought was a broad umbrella thing.
"The next song, "Zero Visibility", fuses..." these commas are unnecessary
"maintaining energy throughout' according" should have a comma after "throughout"
Release
"of the band members in studio" should be either "in-studio" or "in the studio".
"debuted at number three on the Billboard 200" While not technically wrong, I think "entered" is a less ambiguous word than "debuted"
I again wonder if all this chart prose is necessary. Because the charts are below in their own section, a lot of this seems redundant. There's not a huge amount in the prose that isn't already clear in the tables. The single charting info is good, though.
"business man" should be one word
"other people by remaining" would be better as "others by remaining"
Critical reception
The way this section starts is kind of jarring, how it jumps directly into a review and doesn't immediately give the album's name. Personally, I think it's smoothest to start with the classic Metacritic intro to the critical reception section. "The Black Market was met with mostly positive reviews. On Metacritic, it scored 76/100 from 7 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews"." It eases the reader in.
When you omit stuff from a quote, it's clearer to do it like this: "word [...] later word", rather than "word...word."
"it was their most timeless album", an instant of the band being plural.
Punknews to Punknews.org
"outrage, a sentiment which was shared by Hickie." I'd either make this two sentences or replace the comma with a semicolon and make the second part a full sentence.
"much-needed" is more common than what is here, which is "much needed"
"Bray felt there was a "winning quality" listening to the more personal songs as opposed to songs about failed relationships" I'm not sure what was meant here, and the grammar confuses me. Maybe "there was a winning quality in listening"
Track listing
On the "All lyrics written by..." line, it doesn't need a period since it isn't a complete sentence
I see no real issues here
Personnel
Uncapitalize the first credited things, please
"Zero Visibility" should be in quotation marks on McIlrath's credit
There are more songs listed throughout, and they should all get quote marks.
producer to production, engineer to engineering
Management shouldn't be listed as per here. Also as per there, common instruments aren't linked, but I don't think that matters much.
Charts and certifications
The link to the Canadian certification doesn't seem to go where you want it to. I did a ctrl+f search for black market and rise against and saw nothing, so maybe you could link to the specific page.
References
There are some things I could nitpick here like I did last time, but it's tiring. IF YOU WANT, I could go through and do minor tidying on these by myself. I kind of like to, anyway. Your choice, though.
End comments
I think this is worthy of good article status. Of the two I've reviewed, I think The Sufferer & the Witness was a little more well-written, but this is more thorough.

Well-written: Mostly
Verifiable with no original research: Yes
Broad in its coverage: Very thorough
Neutral: Admirably so
Stable: Yes
Illustrated: Yes
Good job, User:Famous Hobo. Address these things, and you've got another good article. CelestialWeevil (talk) 03:01, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

It doesn't seemed to be touched at all in about a month @CelestialWeevil: so maybe their is a chance of failing it. Animation is developing 02:05, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
I would be fine with inputting the changes myself. I don't know if that's against the rules, though. What do you recommend, @Matt294069:? CelestialWeevil (talk) 02:39, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
@CelestialWeevil: The only thing that I can think of is properly to fail it as I don't think its allowed in the rules as I think it has to be done by the nominator and not the person who reviewed it. But this is really one for the grey area here. Animation is developing 23:05, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
CelestialWeevil, it's been another two months and the review has now been open for 100 days; it's time to fail this. Please note that you can certainly input any changes you'd like, but a new reviewer would need to be found. If you're interested in doing so, then my suggestion is to fail the article now, input the many changes, and then nominate it yourself. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:10, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: No problem, I'll go ahead and fail it. It's a shame, but what can ya do. CelestialWeevil (talk) 19:19, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Black Market (Rise Against album)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: DannyMusicEditor (talk · contribs) 16:17, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Given the circumstances, I would be willing to re-review this to make sure all previous concerns are addressed.
I have only one question of my own thus far: if I'm not mistaken, wasn't "The Eco-Terrorist in Me" released before the album as well, even if not really a single? Like available for download/stream? I don't see any coverage of this occurring in the article and it should. dannymusiceditor  oops  16:19, 26 November 2019 (UTC)


### DME's notes
#### Lead and infobox
Your previous reviewer suggested the following: "revolve around dark subject matter" might be better as "matters" with an S or "around a dark subject matter" if it's a specific one. I'm inclined to disagree, is that really how it's supposed to be written? That looks out of the ordinary to me and I will defer to my second reviewer for that.


#### Background and recording
Beginning of paragraph two, the producer choice here is singificant; this is what, their fifth album with them? And also apparently their last, rip Jason and Bill on Wolves lol, hello Nick. Both of these facts should be mentioned.
I think I would press CelestialWeevil's case for "He wanted the growls and broken vocals to remain apparent on The Black Market" being redundant.
This too: " focused on social and political issues." This may need a reference. I couldn't find this mentioned in ref 8 or 9, which are the two nearby ones.


#### Music and lyrics
The version that was reviewed lists Appeal to Reason and "Tragedy + Time" as pop rock, but it now says pop punk. Make sure you have the right one and that the change was intentional, because CelestialWeevil never said anything about that.
"focus on dark subject matter." Another weird singularity. Again I find myself disagreeing with him.


#### Release
Another disagreement - "debuted" is generally the standard used in albums.
I see you didn't change "businessman" as he suggested. Good, don't. It's right the way it is.


#### Critical reception
No issues


#### Tracklist/Personnel
On the "All lyrics written by..." line, it doesn't need a period since it isn't a complete sentence While he's right about the latter part, I always felt it was still proper to list a period anyway. Up to you to decide.
The thing he cited as evidence that management isn't allowed is an essay, and thus is not necessarily policy. You don't have to have it, but it's not necessarily disallowed either.
Everything else is fine. dannymusiceditor  oops  21:50, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

@DannyMusicEditor: @Famous Hobo: Was about to start reviewing the latter's article Endgame but saw this nomination is still on review despite comments having been posted about a month ago, any updates on this from either of you? This is because a review of the album will be pointless otherwise if there's never a response. --Kyle Peake (talk) 08:22, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
He's around. All he needs to do is finish what's here and the article passes. dannymusiceditor  oops  12:13, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
@DannyMusicEditor: Alright, I think I have addressed all issues. The only one I didn't address was the one about Stevenson and Livermore. Their heavy involvement with Rise Against is already mentioned in the sentence "The duo had produced four of Rise Against's last five albums, and the two parties developed a strong rapport with each other over the years." Famous Hobo (talk) 02:00, 6 January 2020 (UTC)