I've listed this article for peer review because this album's 25th anniversary (12 March 2026) is coming up and I'd like to get it to FA before then.

Thanks, 💽 🌙Eclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ ^{(CALL ME IF YOU GET LOST)} 23:08, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Minor comment: Do you think featuring the Japanese edition of the cover is worth being covered in the infobox or body? I'm pretty sure they switched to the Japanese cover on digital streaming recently, although I can't find any coverage on it. [Addendum: Per Template:Infobox album#Template:Extra album cover, it meets the requirements of WP:NFCC#3 because it is a. significantly different from the original and b. widely distributed (Japanese cover) and/or replaces the original (replaced original cover on digital versions.)] More detailed review coming soon.

—Sparkle and Fade (talk • contributions) 08:17, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I caught wind of this and have since gotten the Japanese art restored. I was the original GA editor on this article (my, six years goes by fast), and that cover used to be here. Frankly, I believe that its removal back in October was an error in judgment on the part of that user, and I let it slip past me. mftp dan ^oops 21:15, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This is my first time ever actually reviewing an article on peer review, and I'm a relatively new editor so let me know if I make any mistakes, or if something needs clarification. I'm a bit busy, so this review is gonna be updated several times within the span of two or so days. —Sparkle and Fade (talk • contributions) 07:07, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• It marked a shift from the Chicago house of their first album, Homework (1997), to a house style (...) According to Tony1's guide to linking, a chain link is generally preferable, so I think you can remove the link to house because Chicago house is already linked.
• I think you can put the Remix source (2) to support Bangalter noted that Homework influenced many other artists to mimic its sound, prompting Daft Punk to pursue a different direction to better distinguish themselves. as Remix says "Almost everybody wanted to sound like Daft Punk, and even though many pop music stars approached them with generous offers for remix makeovers, the duo declined." Although it says "Bangalter noted" at the start, so I'm not sure.
• "15 Things You Didn't Know About Daft Punk's Discovery" by Ministry of Sound is a dead link. You can change the url-status parameter as "dead" so it displays the archived URL. On the topic of archiving, archiving all of the external links/cited online sources might be helpful. Further information at Wikipedia:Link rot. (Note: A large amount of the online sourced/external links are archived already but can still be expanded upon.) [Addendum: You can use this at Toolforge to help find dead links and replace them.]
• Unlink "Thomas Bangalter" at Thomas Bangalter specified that (...) in the Theme subsection, already linked in the Background section.
• You can probably change He elaborated that Homework had been "a rough and raw thing" focused on sound production and texture, whereas the goal with Discovery was to explore song structures and new musical forms. This change in sound was inspired by Aphex Twin's "Windowlicker". to: He elaborated that Homework had been "a rough and raw thing" focused on sound production and texture. In contrast, the goal of Discovery was to explore song structures and new musical forms, which was inspired by Aphex Twin's "Windowlicker"." This might be clearer to read, although some of the cohesion might be lost between the first two sentences.
• "Can You Imagine" by the Imperials' on "Crescendolls" capitalize "the" in "The Imperials", even if its not capitalized in the proper name (Anthony and the Imperials); either that or switch to the full name.
• "Discovery uses a number of samples. feels weird to read because of how short it is. I'm not sure how I would go about this, but there's definitely a problem.
  

I'm likely to not cover the "Promotion and release", "Commercial performance", and "Critical reception" sections since I'm not a WP:RECEPTION person.

• Samples. Please add samples. It would really compliment the Compositon subsection. I'll be doing it myself when I get around to it.

—Sparkle and Fade (talk • contributions) 01:20, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Given this is my favorite EDM album, I'll gladly review this one for you. Comments will soon appear below. Lazman321 (talk) 04:58, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Though this article is easy to read for the most part, I recommend copyediting this article before nomination.
• There is information in the lead not mentioned in the body such as Homework being Chicago house or Discovery being praised for being innovative
• Per MOS:LAYOUT, short paragraphs don't usually justify their own headings. As such, the background section should either be expanded to provide more context on Daft Punk and Discovery or be merged with the recording section.

• Done. 💽 🌙Eclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (she/they/it) ^talk/edits 12:09, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Starting in the recording section, I've noticed that some lists of three more items use the serial commas and some don't. For consistency, the article should choose to either use serial commas or don't throughout the article.

•  In progress 💽 🌙Eclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (she/they/it) ^talk/edits 12:19, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• "Discovery is a departure from Daft Punk's previous house sound." - But Discovery is a house album, so how is it a departure? The source used is unreliable anyway, originating from a HuffPost contributor article.

•  Removed 💽 🌙Eclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (she/they/it) ^talk/edits 12:26, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• The article's discussion on "fake" sampling should be more clear. Also, "Face to Face" is worth mentioning in this paragraph as an example of sampling in this album.
• I recommend trying to incorporate more substantial discussion on the singles in the release section
• The 20th anniversary of Interstella 5555 has passed, so it should not be in future tense.
• In the reception section, I recommend consolidating significant points of contentions across reviews into separate paragraphs, using WP:RECEPTION as guidance.
• For the sake of comprehensiveness, there should be more information on this album's influence n the legacy section. Here's some sources I found, though please search for more. [1][2][3][4][5][6]
• Please go through each reference to ensure that their formatting is consistent with each other and that each one is reliable.
• I recommend checking out the book French Connections and seeing what you can incorporate from the book for the sake of comprehensiveness

These are just some suggestions I have for this article. Obviously, for a featured article, this may take some work, though I believe with enough dedication and diligence, this article can pass its FAC. Lazman321 (talk) 08:28, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LunaEclipse: Pinging. Lazman321 (talk) 23:22, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing I noticed. Per WP:HEADERS, all data tables, including the ones on charts and certifications, should have captions. Help:Table has a section about how to add one. Lazman321 (talk) 19:45, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]