Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Release the Stars/archive2

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 10:48, 16 May 2009 [1].

Release the Stars edit

Nominator(s): Another Believer (Talk) 02:18, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured article because I believe it qualifies and I have improved the article based on suggestions made during a previous peer review and FA nomination. Unfortunately, I did not receive a lot of feedback during my last nomination, but I'd like to try again. Thanks! Another Believer (Talk) 02:18, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:34, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All I can argue is that this chart mentions that statistics are archived at Chart Stats, though I am not sure who put this list together. However, this concern was raised during the last FA nomination session. Unfortunately, I cannot find another archive for UK Singles Chart positions that lists "Going to a Town", nor can I find the position verified by a newspaper article. Does this mean the statistic needs to be removed? Can any one offer any other suggestions for finding UK Singles Chart positions? --Another Believer (Talk) 21:33, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This book is probably your best bet. If I pass a bookshop over the weekend, I will endeavour to a) check that the position is actually correct and b) get you the page number etc so you can cite it to the book...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:23, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Found the book, confirmed the chart position, changed the ref for you........ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:30, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, thank you, thank you sooo much! Seriously, much appreciated! --Another Believer (Talk) 22:33, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments
    • "released under Geffen Records" - is it a standard American usage to say that an album is released "under" a record label? It sounds very bizarre to me here in the UK, where we'd say "released on Geffen Records" but if it's a standard Americanism then I guess it would be OK per WP:ENGVAR
Done. Ah! I always write "under", as in under the umbrella of the DreamWorks label, even though it has been questioned several times with other articles I have edited. I have changed "under" to "through", and will try to remember to do so in the future.
    • "charted in 12 countries" =>"charted in twelve countries"
Done. I was under the impression numbers larger than 10 were to be written numerically. However, I have changed "12" to "twelve".
    • "his mother's (folk musician Kate McGarrigle) cancer diagnosis" - I realise it's technically correct, but the separation between "mother's" and "cancer" makes it read very strangely. Maybe something like "the cancer diagnosis received by his mother (folk musician Kate McGarrigle)" might be better, I dunno.....
Done.
    • "lasted on the chart for two weeks total" => "....two weeks in total"
Done.
    • "Claiming that he wrote the song in just five minutes, the political track....." - as it stands, the subject of the first clause grammatically is "the political track". As the track did not write itself, it needs to be changed to something like "The political track, which Wainwright claimed he wrote in just five minutes......"
Done. Thanks!
    • "While she conceded Release the Stars" => "While she conceded that Release the Stars"
Done.
    • Don't need to relink Sanssouci, Frederick the Great, etc in the "Reception" section as they were all linked previously
Done.
    • "Following is a table of 2007 "End of Year" list placements by various publications:" - sentence fragment, could do with being changed into a proper sentence
Done. Now reads: "The following table displays some of the 2007 "End of Year" list placements by various publications." If you can think of a better sentence, feel free to let me know.
Thanks so much for your time, suggestions, and assistance. Much appreciated, and please let me know if there is anything else I can do to improve the article. --Another Believer (Talk) 18:52, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All seems goos now, support (apologies for taking so long to revisit) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much! Feel free to let me know if there is anything else I can do to improve the article. --Another Believer (Talk) 02:30, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image review - Non-free image meets WP:NFCC and the free image has a verifiable license and an adequate description. Awadewit (talk) 02:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments Support – Pretty good, I have some suggestions:
    • In section: Conception:
  • Remove the parentheses around "folk musician Kate McGarrigle"
I believe this is an example of apposition, but with the extra commas, I thought the sentence came across as a confusing run-on. Therefore, I felt parentheses were the most appropriate form of punctuation.
  • A citation is needed after "fueled his creative intensity in some kind of displaced attempt to get her well".
Citation is located at the end of the sentence. I did, however, change "fuelled" to "fueled", as either can be correct but the former is used more often by the British.
  • Marius de Vries, who produced both of Wainwright's previous albums (Want One and Want Two) offered his skills to Release the Stars, as did longtime band members Jeff Hill, Jack Petruzelli, and Matt Johnson. – offered his "skills"? I assume you mean experience or expertise?
Done. Changed to "expertise".
    • In section: Track listing:
  • Should be: All songs written by Wainwright on the album:
Done.

I look forward to supporting this article. ceranthor 23:24, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! I appreciate your suggestions and support. --Another Believer (Talk) 23:50, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

  • "twelve countries"-->12 countries per WP:MOSNUM
Done. Had "12" originally, but was suggested to do otherwise above. Reverted to numerical form.
  • I think the "Songs" section could be renamed to "Styles and themes".
Done.
  • No citation for "Wal-Mart online bonus track".
There really isn't one for it. The song was available on Wal-Mart's site for download when the album was released, but it is no longer listed there (so cannot provide the link).
  • No need to link 18th century.
Done.
  • "Marius de Vries, who produced both of Wainwright's previous albums (Want One and Want Two)" Comma after here.
Done.
Done. Thanks so much for your help! --Another Believer (Talk) 00:40, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, 1a and 1c. The writing isn't bad, but the major problem for me is the over-abundance of quotations. I don't feel like I was reading a Wikipedian's writing so much as I was reading a patchwork of Wainwright's and others' words. Unless what someone said is so profound that it bears direct quoting, we need to paraphrase and write our own prose. The meat of this article consists of quotations that you've patched together with transitional prose. This won't work. I also feel there is a significant gap in research having to do with the actual music on the album. You've got a lot of information on the inspiration behind the songs, but what about the actual musical analysis?
I completely agree that I tend to over-quote. However, I think it's based more on my fear of plagiarism, so I often use direct quotes to describe songs, their inspirations, themes, and criticisms. If you see any instances where quotes can be paraphrased, feel free to re-word. It's a habit I am trying to work on, believe me. Can you further detail what you mean by a gap in research having to do with the "actual music" and its analysis, or direct me to a great example of this? --Another Believer (Talk) 03:24, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some other minor niggles:

    • MoS problems spotted—please check for logical punctuation in quotations. I fixed a couple but there are more.
Thank you for the corrections. --Another Believer (Talk) 03:24, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Revealed in January 2007, Wainwright declared the overall theme" Dangling modifier. Wainwright was not revealed, the theme was.
Changed to "Revealing the overall theme in January 2007, Wainwright declared the album was..." --Another Believer (Talk) 03:24, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • "The following week (May 26)" I don't follow how May 26 is the "following week" after May 5.
I corrected this. Now contains right dates.
    • "'Going to a Town' was released as a single in digital format ..." This will mean little to a lot of readers. Why the wikilink and better explanation further down for UK?
    • "and is about the perspective 'someone has who looks at athletes, but who is not an athlete'." Is this quotation transcribed properly? It doesn't make sense.
Better? I hate to admit it, but Wainwright's speech and lyrics are often grammatically incorrect.
    • Three sentences about the Cover art and liner notes? If that's really all your research could bear, it doesn't need its own heading.
It's more that I wasn't sure where else to put it. Any suggestion?
    • "... and a winning act was chosen for each concert." Passive voice eliminates the subject. Who chose? If it was Wainwright, that is worth stating since they usually get a PR person to do something like that.
It's uncertain, though I'd imagine it was Wainwright's management team.
--Laser brain (talk) 01:42, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I was just re-reading the article, and that was the sense (over-quotation) that I got, leading to some instances where the tone is not quite what we're looking for. Example: ""Do I Disappoint You", the album's opener, "sees [Wainwright] present a withering defense of his own human frailties, while one orchestral battalion after another mount their attacks and Martha Wainwright summons 'CHAOS!' and 'DESTRUCTION!' like a marauding Fury"." This is an ideal example sentence that has a lot of fluff but doesn't really capture the essence of the songs or themes. See Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches for information about paraphrasing. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:01, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Laser, thank you for your feedback and suggestions. I made some edits, and look forward to more feedback. I am willing to do what it takes to get the article to featured status. Dabomb, you've helped in many ways as well, with this and other articles I have put together. I would appreciate any help in improving the article. Thanks again! --Another Believer (Talk) 03:24, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In response about overquoting, it cannot be the reviewers that do this work—you'll have to take some time to examine the prose and make revisions accordingly (or contact a copy editor). As I stated, anything that is not profoundly memorable or difficult to paraphrase should be paraphrased. If the speaker has poor grammar, as you acknowledge Wainwright does, that is all the more reason to paraphrase. On the topic of musical discussion and analysis, take a look at the Music heading of Loveless (album) for example. There, you have substantive research and discussion on the actual instrumentation and methodology of the songs. You may have to move into a library search of print sources. --Laser brain (talk) 18:19, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Release_the_Stars/archive2&oldid=1138469917"