Talk:Endgame (Rise Against album)

Endgame (Rise Against album) 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 2, 2020. (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 articles

Alternative music Low‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Endgame's album cover

http://www.riseagainst.com/exclusive/Revealed.aspx can i put this as an album cover for this page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.54.248.168 (talk) 00:32, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Genre

Shouldnt that say 'TBD' instead of 'TBA'. Its not like theyll come out and Anounce "Hey, this is a melodic hardcore record". Itll be Determined by contributorsJasper420 00:44, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why list Alternative Rock as a genre? They released only two songs so far, which are both Melodic Hardcore. Also, Rise Against's usual genre is Melodic Hardcore. So Alternative Rock has to go, at least untill the album will be released. --Revilal90 (talk) 08:22, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What!?!?! Allmusic says that Endgame is Alternative/Indie Rock but not Melodic Hardcore??--188.26.48.8 (talk) 09:05, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tracklisting

Either source it or revert it to the original "confirmed songs" list. I recognise this as the leaked one that's been mentioned on the band's forums but the announcement of the Endgame pre-order had the tracklisting still hidden as "top secret" so to suggest they are the confirmed titles is misleading. 109.153.169.103 (talk) 18:20, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I second this. The only source comes from an unofficial eBay listing and doesn't constitute as real evidence. Mattimis (talk) 04:27, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edited back to old "Confirmed tracks" model, edit as approprate. 109.153.169.103 (talk) 22:35, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Universal-music.de tracklisting

While I admit it's trustworthy, I think the track lengths are only filler. Especially since we already know the length of Architects is just over a minute, certainly not closer to four... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.153.169.103 (talk) 15:18, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's purely speculation though. You have to realize that the "teaser" of Architects that was released was basically the same 15-second riff repeated four times.... Mattimis (talk) 20:40, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know this has nothing to do with the track listings but i think noting that make it stop (septembers children)is about exactly that kids who took theyre lifes in september of 2010, tyler clementi, harrison chase brown and others. should that be added somewhere?67.217.9.152 (talk) 01:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Architects

I removed the internal links from the lead track on their album because a) I don't believe that it's actually a single of the album and probably doesn't warrant its own article, and b) the current link simply redirected to Architect, a completely unrelated article. Let me know here or on my talk page if it's a problem. άλφα7248^Talk 15:14, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Make it stop (September's Children)

Should this song get a bit longer mention on the article? It has received some press for the theme and the song has a short paragaph on the article of the band. Valosapeli (talk) 12:48, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Endgame (Rise Against album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lizzy150 (talk · contribs) 16:01, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Famous Hobo:

I will be assessing this article. Looks quite good. Here's my comments after a quick read..

Lead

"After a lengthy tour in support of Appeal to Reason" - I assume that's their previous album, so perhaps state that.
"It remains Rise Against's highest position on the chart." - Would it be better to state that it's a record, eg. 'It holds the record for the band's highest position on the chart'?
"charted highly" - you've used this in two paragraphs already, so I'll be inclined to reword one of them.
"although some reviewers felt" - probably don't need the word 'reviewers' here again.

Background

"over three week period"- over a three week period

Composition

"slick production" - what does that exactly mean? It was a smooth recording process?
"Social and political commentary" - should we mention specifics, as this is quite a broad subject?
"about the slow response time for aid to disaster stricken areas" - I feel as if you could simplify this sentence a little, eg. 'about the slow response for providing disaster relief' (you could then wiki link disaster relief)

Release

What's the reason for using numbers and words to express figures? (eg. number 22', 'number forty-five') Should we be consistent?

Reception

No issues here, the content is good. However, how did you structure this? The first and second paragraphs are positive reviews, with the last sentences being a negative. The third and last paragraphs look like a mixed review? Do you think its worth making it clear-cut, for instance, first paragraph is positive, second is mixed and third is negative?

However, article is mostly well-written. Appears to be stable and neutral. Broadly covered, no copyright violations detected. Appropriately illustrated with media and image files. There are sufficient inline citations and all references are working. If I find any more issues, I will post them below. Thanks, Just Lizzy^(talk) 16:01, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: @Lizzy150: I agree that this article is quite good, but I suggest that reception should be re-titled to critical reception, which release should be re-titled to release and promotion. Also, the album charted on the year end Billboard 200 and Rock Albums charts in the US, which can be added to the year end charts; this should be on the left side of the col with weekly charts since it is charts and certifications section, while certification should remain on the right. --Kyle Peake (talk) 19:45, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment Kyle. @Famous Hobo: where are you with this article? Have you made all the necessary changes? Thanks, Just Lizzy^(talk) 22:48, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Lizzy150: My apologies for the delay, but I think I have addressed your issues. Regarding the reception section, I tried to model it after video game articles. The first paragraph gives a general overview of whether critics liked the album or not, then each subsequent paragraphs focuses on a specific part of the album, such as the music or the lyrics. Famous Hobo (talk) 17:14, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Now passing. Just Lizzy^(talk) 12:05, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]