Monotron (final version) received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which on 13 April 2023 was archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
A fact from Monotron appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 7 February 2023 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that a heavily modified Monotron synthesizer (PCB pictured) was nicknamed "FrankenSynth" by music resource site Ask.Audio?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Musical Instruments, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of musical instruments 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.Musical InstrumentsWikipedia:WikiProject Musical InstrumentsTemplate:WikiProject Musical Instrumentsmusical instruments articles
This article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Leave messages at the project talk pageElectronicsWikipedia:WikiProject ElectronicsTemplate:WikiProject Electronicselectronic articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands 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.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk pageorWikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article does appear to meet DYK requirements and the hooks are cited inline and verified. I didn't find any close paraphrasing. A QPQ is not required. I'm not really a big fan of either hook since they seem to be reliant on knowing what Korg is. Neither hook seems to be that intriguing unless you're familiar with the brand. Perhaps other alternative hooks or hook angles can be proposed here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:42, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Schminnte: Thank you for the suggestions. I've checked all the sources in the article; however, only the Ask.Audio source actually calls the synth the "FrankenSynth", and while the other two sources do discuss it, they don't use that name. Was "FrankenSynth" the name given by the creator, or is it Ask.Audio's creation? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:41, 26 January 2023 (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.
@Schminnte: hi, I thought I'd return the favour and review this article for you :) I'll get started either tonight or (more likely) tomorrow evening (NZST), and leave comments in the template below. Cheers! — Jon (talk) 05:04, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Just quickly, I took the liberty of expanding the Wikidata item a bit and connecting it to the Commons category, which gets a free infobox. Speaking of infoboxes, it's not a GA requirement but I wonder if this article might benefit from {{Infobox synthesizer}}? Anyway, proper comments when I get time later. — Jon (talk) 09:33, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was not going to add an infobox because it's a series. I thought it might be misleading to add an infobox for only one synth in the series. I appreciate the usefulness of infoboxes, but I don't add them when they won't add anything not in the lede/will just confuse things. Schminnte (talk • contribs)09:43, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've been a bit preoccupied this week, but I've reviewed 5 and 6 below; I hope to finish reviewing at the weekend.—Jon (talk) 10:38, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Schminnte: I've put a list of comments here in a separate section, and then I'll re-assess remaining criteria afterwards (rather than trying to match each point with a criterion). I should also stress that I think this article is very good, well researched and presented, and I suspect I'm basically nit-picking at this point...! — Jon (talk) 21:41, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Lead: If it is stylised all lower-case as "monotron", then we could use {{Lowercase title}} (although it is upper-cased "Monotron" throughout the article?)
§ Use in music: introduce "Dutch producer" Martijn Deijkers, RAC, "Canadian composer" Andrew Noseworthy
§ Sources: we can surround the list with {{refbegin}} and {{refend}} to make them the same smaller text used by §Citations.
§ External links: since Wikidata is set up correctly, we only need to use {{Commons-inline}} and {{Official website}} with no parameters.
@ Jon: All should now be done, apart from two things. 1. In this case, "Stylised in lowercase" is a way to show that Korg themselves styles it that way. However, almost all other coverage uses a capital letter, so that's why it's like that. 2. I found that putting the title in for Make and Electronic Musican was too clunky. I hope you understand. All other points, including the one on schematics are done. Is it OK to pass now? Schminnte (talk • contribs)11:22, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is generally good, and the references support the content well. In some places however I think there is an over-use of references. For instance, we don't need three references mid-sentence to establish the fact that it was announced in 2010 at Musikmesse (one of which is missing a lang parameter to indicate it is in Spanish); one will suffice (§ Monotron). Similarly, three refs to say that the VCF is the same one used in the MS-10 and MS-20 (§ Design); two to support that the Duo was exhibited at NAMM; and so on. If extra references are not being re-used elsewhere, consider adding them to the External links section instead (or stashing them on the talk page for later).
I usually use two references when they are available. The Future Music reference has been removed but I think the others are fine. WP:CITEOVERKILL says it's a problem when there's more than 3 references.
Accepted; I should state that I did not have a problem with the Spanish article per se, just that I (incorrectly) thought it did not have a language param in the ref to say it was in Spanish.
There is some over-linking in the references themselves too; when linking the workorpublisher (e.g. Sound on Sound) it is only necessary to link the first occurrence in a reference, in keeping with MOS linking.
I would disagree. WP:REPEATLINK says ...there is no problem with repeating the same link in many citations within an article.
Excellent use of well-known and authoritative resources throughout; opinions and quotations are clearly linked to published reviews or other sources, and there's nothing contentious or counter-intuitive to be concerned with for 2b.
Not required for GA, but perhaps we can provide the escholarship URL for the concerto?
I have not found any close paraphrasing in a sample of sources (though I have not checked every single one); the copyvio report lists a couple of sources at > 20% but that is due to (correctly referenced) quotations of text from the source.
The point about published schematics and labelled PCB solder points is repeated four times in the §Modifications section.
Could you explain what you mean? I only see that the first paragraph in §Modifications discusses the schematics. I see the second paragraph as expanding on that point.
The second quote is good but also repeats the point made in the first; it could stand on its own without its last sentence, since we've already established that earlier, and then reword the quote's introduction, e.g. the sentence He believed that the Monotron being used for modifications was a by-product of the synthesiser's analogue circuits... could be something like "While acknowledging that the labeling and schematics helped, he believed that the Monotron being used for modifications was also a by-product of..."
All images have copyright tags or non-free rationale tags (pass). Furthermore, images are all either CC-licensed and uploaded by users or imported from Flickr, or do not qualify for copyright (KORG logo image), which will be useful for Feature Article status later.
Suggestion: it would be neat to include a sound sample in the appropriate place, e.g. the two sounds already on Commons that relate to the Delay and Duo models.
I considered this (I uploaded the samples!) but realized that it would be sandwiching the text. I preferred to link the category instead.
All captions are succinct and appropriate, and images relate to the discussion presented. Two captions have full-stops because they are sentences (otherwise they are not needed).
Overall:
Pass/fail:
(Criteria marked are unassessed)
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.
The article does appear to meet DYK requirements and the hooks are cited inline and verified. I didn't find any close paraphrasing. A QPQ is not required. I'm not really a big fan of either hook since they seem to be reliant on knowing what Korg is. Neither hook seems to be that intriguing unless you're familiar with the brand. Perhaps other alternative hooks or hook angles can be proposed here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:42, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose those work. Leaving the final choice to the promoter (I'm more partial to ALT2b since it doesn't seem that Ask.Audio is a well-known site and I think it needs context). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
are unassessed)
