Talk:Angels Brought Me Here/GA1

GA Reassessment

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

I was browsing through Wikipedia, stumbled across this article and realised that it isn't Good Article quality at all. First and foremost, the lead section needs work. It doesn't address important aspects such as the music video (which I will get to later) or live performances. Instead, it has sentences such as "In January 2010 ARIA published information on the highest selling releases of the previous decade" which doesn't even need to be in the article, let alone the lead. Further, the lead mentions that it reached number 1 in four Asian countries, although the chart performance section does not list this. To make a point, the article currently fails section 1) b of Good Article criteria.

Now for the music video section. It has one sentence with no significance (or sources!) to present Good Article quality. Who was the director? When was the video released? Where was it filmed? What was taking place? All this needs to be addressed because it's failing section 3 of GAC. The notable performances section has five sentences, two of which are completely unsourced. The listing of charts also needs work, where the certification table should be separate to the performance table. It should look something like this. Till I Go Home (talk) 12:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree with many of your points regarding information about the video and lack of tables for charting in other countries, and that by the standards of today the article may not meet Good Article criteria. But your statement that the fact that the song was the highest selling song in Australia last decade both for an Australian act and all acts including overseas acts does not belong in the article seems ridiculous to me. Surely an article about a song should have information about its chart success, and being the highest selling song in a whole decade is a very impressive thing. Removing it from the article would be removing very notable information about the song. The only people I can think of who would object to that information being in the article are Anthony Callea and or some of his fans, as his song was long thought to be the highest seller until ARIA published their End of Decade Charts.

Do what you like regarding the article, but if the End of Decade information is removed I will put it back in.

Natbelle (talk) 00:54, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Natbelle, I think you misunderstood my point. The sentence should absolutely stay in the article (and lead!) because it is a very noteworthy achievement. However, the lead specifically read "In January 2010 ARIA published information on the highest selling releases of the previous decade". This specific sentence is worded very badly as it does not pertain to the song in question. A more appropriate sentence would be "In January 2010, ARIA announced that "Angels Brought Me Here" was the highest selling single of the decade" which addresses the song. Nevertheless, the issue has been fixed. Till I Go Home (talk) 01:08, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

No worring Till I Go Home. I see what you mean now. I just flew off the handle because I have been trying to get references to Anthony Callea having the highest selling single removed off his articles, but they keep sneaking back in. You are right, mentioning it is the highest seller with the citation should be enough, and no need to mention Callea either. That was just one of my efforts to have the truth on Wikipedia about who had the highest seller.

As to the other problems, getting valid references for some will be difficult. The official video has vanished from the internet, along with many articles which could validate some of the other information. Even the New Zealand record of certifications has disappeared over the last few months as Radioscope which held records from 2007 onwards got hacked and has been down since, and RIANZ have mysteriously removed their archived charts which showed certifications. They only show the current Top 40 on their site, and I can no longer find any online record of their certifications. While the New Zealand Chart site holds records of chart runs, they don't have certification information. Frustrating to say the least. But every page with NZ certifications is in the same boat.

As to the other charting countries, we only have references from bios etc for his Asian charting. It was referred to on an Australian tv special in 2004 and I would imagine it was on his old website, as it was common knowledge amongst his fans and is in his official bio on his management website. But Sebastian was with BMG for the first year after Idol, and when it merged with Sony new artist websites were created. The information on his site only goes back to June 2005and I have never been able to find charts for those countries online. It will be very difficult to get this article up to the standard it should be to keep its Good Article status, and at the moment I am in the middle of a project making improvements on another article.

Natbelle (talk) 01:45, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Comment I'm interested in maintaining the article's GA status and as you can see I have jumped in to make some changes as I see fit. The claim "It also reached number-one in four Asian countries" in the Lead is problematic. Both refs are not reliable for this information, the first is Sebastian's management (biased) and the second looks like a blog repeating information from a BMG site (biased/self-published?). Neither is independent of the artist. Unless anyone can find a good reliable source then I will delete this sentence and similar information in the body of the text. Meanwhile I'm going back to improving the overall standard of the article.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 20:12, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I have a further problem with current ref [7] at sing365.com; which says it is sourced from http://bestmusictop.com/forum/index.php/topic,298.0.html This is a dead link – I couldn't find it at Wayback Machine either. However it appears to be a fan forum and hence is not reliable.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 03:32, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

• I removed that unreliable source you were talking about, fixed the chart section issues and also reworked the lead. Till I Go Home (talk) 11:08, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I removed the contentious sentence re: #1 on four Asian charts. If a reliable source can be found then it could be returned. I've worked further on improving the article and addressing some of the concerns raised by Till I Go Home.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:23, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Keep I've finished the major changes that I believe the article needed to remain at GA. If you have any additonal concerns could you please raise them?--shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:08, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

• It's now been over a week and the issues of the article have been addressed. I'm closing this as kept. Till I Go Home (talk) 00:59, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

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.