Talk:Beautiful Garbage

Beautiful Garbage has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 29, 2015. (Reviewed version).

Albums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Alternative music Mid‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Electronic music Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic music 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.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Music

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music 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.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Written by a fan?

I'd never even heard of Shut Your Mouth before - the single sold pretty poorly, at least in australia (peaked at 88), whilst cherry lips made number 7 and is very well known. The article though makes it sound like Shut Your Mouth is true garbage style along with being the best selling single, and cherry lips is a lesser electro-pop song that was only 'a moderately successful single'. Would only australians get the same interpretation as me? or was the article written by someone biased against the electropop style of cherry lips?

Correct Name? / Requested Move

Is the correct name "beautifulgarbage"? Because the iTunes Music Store uses "Beautiful Garbage" and the Garbage official website does in some places as well. Alex 17:17, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

-In response to this, yes the proper title is "beautifulgarbage", soemtimes spelt "BeautifulGarbage". Any other spelling is in error. Breakinguptheguy

The Wikipedia policy on this matter states clearly "Do not replicate stylized typography in logos and album art, though a redirect may be appropriate (for example, KoЯn redirects to Korn (band)).". Since spelling the name "beautifulgarbage" is only a typography difference, I think this article should be moved to "Beautiful Garbage", leaving a redirect at the current location. Within the article we can still spell it "beautifulgarbage", if, indeed, this is the official spelling. Hymyly^T@C 23:00, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am hereby also posting an official request for this page to be moved, since this matter has not recieved any attention for almost a week. Hymyly^T@C 19:54, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Based on evidence from freedb and Gracenote, support this move. Chris cheese whine 04:34, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that Wikipedia policy applies here, since this is not a "stylized typography; the title only uses the standard Latin alphabet. The example given in the policy is Korn using a non-Latin character for "R". That being said, their own site calls it "Beautiful Garbage", so Support. -SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 23:48, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"beautifulgarbage" with no space and lower-case letters is an example of stylized typography, as it is rendered in a way other than the norm. See typography. Chris cheese whine 15:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Recury 14:52, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To me it seems a large majority agrees, possibly even consensus has been reached. I will now move the page. Hymyly^T@C 21:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page moved. I also changed to Beautiful Garbage within the article as this is how it was spelled on Grabage's official website. Hymyly^T@C 21:20, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Garbage-Beautiful-Garbage-197506.jpg

Image:Garbage-Beautiful-Garbage-197506.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:08, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dead external links to Allmusic website – January 2011

Since Allmusic have changed the syntax of their URLs, 1 link(s) used in the article do not work anymore and can't be migrated automatically. Please use the search option on http://www.allmusic.com to find the new location of the linked Allmusic article(s) and fix the link(s) accordingly, prefereably by using the {{Allmusic}} template. If a new location cannot be found, the link(s) should be removed. This applies to the following external links:

http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=Ajpkvu3r0anxk

--CactusBot (talk) 10:11, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Reviews section as per: Template:Infobox_album#Professional_reviews

| Reviews =

Allmusic link
Dotmusic link
Entertainment Weekly (B) link
Kerrang! 09/29/2001
NME link
Q 10/01/2001
Rolling Stone (neutral) link

Saved for future reference.

File:Shirleyroseland.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Shirleyroseland.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations

What should I do?

Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

A further notification will be placed when/if the image is deleted. This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:26, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Beautiful Garbage/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Coemgenus (talk · contribs) 15:01, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this over the next few days. --Coemgenus (talk) 15:01, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Comments

In general, this looks very good. Citations, stability, NPOV, and breadth of coverage are all good. Images are all fair use, and I think the fair use rationales are appropriate.
The "World tour" section has some issues with tense. At time it sounds like you're writing as if the tour is ongoing.
"Critical reception" has the same problem in places. ("He adds" rather than "he added," for example.)
There are some one-sentence paragraphs in the last section that could probably be combined.

Coemgenus, all three done. Lapadite (talk) 04:02, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I made a few more minor changes, but I think there's nothing else that needs fixing. Great article, I'm happy to promote it. --Coemgenus (talk) 13:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Beautiful Garbage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080828132511/http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun02/articles/garbage.asp to http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun02/articles/garbage.asp
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/boylikearose/articles-bass-mar2002.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110520151502/http://www.ultratop.be/fr/annual.asp?year=2001&cat=a to http://www.ultratop.be/fr/annual.asp?year=2001&cat=a

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:40, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good article

I think the article needs more images and other media to keep this status ThisIs00k (talk) 16:19, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]