Talk:Cycadelic Records/GA1

Latest comment: 7 months ago by Kingsacrificer in topic GA review

GA review

edit

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.


Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk · contribs) 19:51, 29 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: Kingsacrificer (talk · contribs) 18:45, 19 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Summary: Ideally, a quickfail. Too much focus on Kim as the subject instead of the Swap Meet. Will wait for @Vacant0 to share his opinion.
1. Well-written
  • This article focuses more on Wan Joon Kim than Compton Swap meet.
  • Lead section should not focus on Kim as much.
  • History section can be subdivided for better structuring.
  • Some stylistic choices can be improved. For example, Kim died on March 13, 2013, from a cancer
  • Done.
2. Verifiable
Note: Only made spot checks.
  • The line Kim became known as the "godfather of gangsta rap". is not supported by either of the cited sources. The first source doesn't even mention it, the second mentions it as a negative (Wan Joon Kim didn't intend to become the godfather of gangsta rap.
  • Citing A wholesaler suggested he sell the R&B;, gospel, funk and rap coming from New York, though he eventually developed an ear for black music as A music wholesaler recommended that Kim sell African-American music such as hip-hop. may be a bit of a stretch.
  • Not all archived links are displaying the articles fully.
  • Removed the archive link that doesn't work.
3. Broad in its coverage
  • Too much focus on Kim (WP:DUE) and much lesser focus on the Swap meet itself. I suggest creating a new page for Kim and his life story, and only have a passing mention in this article.
  • @Kingsacrificer and Vacant0: This article discusses Kim as the person who sold things at the Compton Swap Meet. There should not be a separate article about him, per WP:NOPAGE—all of the sources about him are in the context of the Compton Swap Meet, making it the sole reason for his notability. This article contains pretty much all of the information about both him and the store. (The store itself is mostly, but not entirely, discussed in the context of Kim's business.) However, I understand your concern that this page is nominally about a building but spends too much time describing a person. I suggest a different solution: the article could be moved to the title "Cycadelic Records". That way, the information about Kim would be background about the founder of the company, and the information about the Compton Swap Meet would be background about where the company operated. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧(talk | contribs) 19:45, 21 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
That would be a good solution to this. Vacant0 (talk contribs) 20:24, 21 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
That sounds good. I will mark this GAN as a fail now, and wait for you to create that article. Although, in that case, giving Compton Swap Meet too much of a mention could also be problematic. Kingsacrificer (talk) 06:33, 22 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
  • Not enough is said about the other vendors of the swap meet.
  • Several rappers have referenced the Compton Swap Meet in their songs: You mention Kendrick Lamar for this, but nobody else. Could be worth it to name some other artists.
  • Added.
4. Neutral
No issues with Neutrality as such.
5. Stable
No edit wars seen.
6. Illustrated
An image of the building, or any store, especially of that time would be a great resource. Have you considered requesting the same on Wikimedia Commons? Kingsacrificer (talk) 19:32, 20 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Hmm... Sources do not seem to be an issue, they're all reliable per WP:RSP. Grammatical and MOS issues could be quickly fixed. But yeah, most of the article actually discusses Kim, rather than the history of Compton Swap Meet. I'd suggest creating a new article for Kim and then trimming this article so that it mostly covers Compton Swap Meet. It's up to you whether you want to quickfail it or not. Maybe we should wait for the nominator to respond and to see what they think about this? I'm not sure. Vacant0 (talk contribs) 12:42, 21 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Sure!
@Vigilantcosmicpenguin waiting for your response. Kingsacrificer (talk) 17:42, 21 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Vacant0: Starting on this review. Currently reading through the article, will try to collate my thoughts soon.

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.