Talk:Blood on the Silver Screen

Blood on the Silver Screen has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: March 24, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Albums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum

Pop music Low‑importance

	Pop music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Red: Music (2025)

This article was created or improved during the Music initiative hosted by the Women in Red project in 2025. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red

GA review

Passed. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 00:46, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Blood on the Silver Screen/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: voorts (talk · contribs) 17:48, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Grumpylawnchair (talk · contribs) 04:53, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be reviewing this in the next few days. Feel free to trout me if I don't get around to this in a timely fashion. Stuff marked optional is not covered under the GA criteria, but I think they would be necessary for a potential FA.

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Earwig's is happy and all quotes are attributed properly inline
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Ref spotcheck

2: Good
5: Good
15: Good
20: Good
24: Good

Concerns

relying on her classical training to analyze its parts worded a bit awkwardly - is there any way you can rephrase that sentence?
- Fixed.
citing Sasami's songwriting and production who?
- Fixed.
wanted to build up its promotion the album's or Domino's?
- I think it's clear from context that it's the album.
evaluated together put "that" between those two words
- That wouldn't make sense.
Is "Personnel" the best name for that section? It is not immediately obvious what it is referring to for readers
- Yes. See WP:PERSONNEL.

Conclusion

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow you to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on.
- With all of my concerns addressed, I will pass this nomination. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 00:46, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Optional:

"the thing that makes it pop ... is that it makes the listener feel like a main character" two concerns per Wikipedia:Quotations - the ellipses should be enclosed in brackets ([...] instead of ....) to specify that the ellipses were not originally in the text; put "[emphasis in the original]" after "character" but before the quotation mark
- The MOS says to only put ellipses in brackets if there are already ellipses in the original quote. See MOS:....
- [emphasis in original] is not required per MOS:ITALQUOTE.
"madness, obsession[,] and desire ... into big, bold pop songs" same ellipses concern as above
- See above.

@Grumpylawnchair:: Thanks for the review. Best, voorts (talk/contributions) 00:43, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that Sasami changed her sound for a third time for her third album Blood on the Silver Screen?

Source: Rigotti, Alex (2025-03-07). "Sasami: 'It felt edgy to do something that's cringy to me'". NME. Archived from the original on 2025-03-10. Retrieved 2025-03-14.

ALT1: ... that Sasami studied pop music using her training in classical music before writing her first pop album Blood on the Silver Screen? Source: Rigotti, Alex (2025-03-07). "Sasami: 'It felt edgy to do something that's cringy to me'". NME. Archived from the original on 2025-03-10. Retrieved 2025-03-14.
Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Sasradilaga rebellion

Improved to Good Article status by Voorts (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 11 past nominations.

voorts (talk/contributions) 01:10, 24 March 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Date, size, refs, QPQ, spotchecks, all GTG, confirmed GA status. Just one concern for ALT0 - is "changed her sound" really good English? I'd say she changed her music style, but sound is too generic, IMHO, for this concept. I think ALT0 is more interesting than ALT1, but we need to work this detail out - the current wording made me wonder if the subject is an instrument, animal, or other thing that makes "sounds". --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:14, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- "Sound" is used colloquially to refer an artist's genre/style/vibe. You can change it to genre, though, since that's also correct. voorts (talk/contributions) 12:59, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Piotrus: see wikt:sound#Noun #3: "(music) A distinctive style and sonority of a particular musician, orchestra etc." voorts (talk/contributions) 19:22, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    - Per above, with preference for ALT0 and nonetheless changing sound to genre for clarity. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:06, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]