Talk:Up! Live in Chicago

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Up! Live in Chicago article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Up! Live in Chicago 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 5, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

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

Country music Low‑importance

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

Chicago Low‑importance

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Film: Canadian / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Canadian cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Canada: Music Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian music.

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.

Fair use rationale for Image:Ulic.jpg

Image:Ulic.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 02:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Up! Live in Chicago/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 07:18, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the short delay. I decided that in light of recent events, I will still complete the review. I'm not going to just abandon it. Posting soon :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:48, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Round One

Lead

The concert itself differed from those of the Up! Tour (2003–04) -> The concert itself differed from that of the Up! Tour (2003–04)
- I think it should be those, as there are multiple concerts on tour. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 21:20, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Actually, we are talking about the concerts synopsis and structure, so no, that wouldn't be plural.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done.
Behind-the-scenes footage was filmed in the same week where Twain visited local landmarks and events -> comma needed
- Done.
it featured additional performances void from the television presentation, -> not included in the
- It is. See the release section. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 21:20, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - What I wrote is the same thing except re-worded...--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done.
Up! Live in Chicago' was
Up! Live in Chicago' was also a commercial success -> This sentence is a mixture of PEACOCK and NPOV; we don't need for you to tell us that, just stick with the facts
- Done.
It was also certified platinum in Australia -> refrain from little choppy sentences like this
- I don't think there's anything wrong with having this particular sentence (just to have a good mixture of lengths with sentences). When all sentences all long, it can be a bit overwhelming for the reader, and, of course, when they are all short, it can be choppy and difficult to read. I don't know. That's just my opinion. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 21:20, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I understand. But for "well-written" prose, we try and refrain from choppy and small sentences that can easily be merged into another. But now at that. Why mention Australia and not Austria or Brazil? I would understand the US, being that its the largest market by far, but having those two is just an inconsistency.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - I see your point. Other countries were added. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 00:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The video was also source to the music videos for Twain's singles -> Doesn't read very well
- Done.

Background

Three and a half years apart from her previous concert, -> Over three years after filming her previous concert,
- No, she had three and a half years without performing a live show. Is "Over three and a half years after performing previous concert" O.K.? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Still doesn't read well. "After performing previous concert"?--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - What about "Three and a half years after her last live concert"? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 00:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
three outdoor concerts between Europe and North America -> I know you have "in" right after, but between isn't the best word here
- Done.
three outdoor concerts -> I don't understand, isn't it a complete tour?
- No, it wasn't a tour. She performed three concerts to promote her album before her actual tour started. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - That's the thing. You have to make this clear enough from the way its written. ou won't be there to explain this to every reader.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Twain scheduled the trek primarily because of her prolonged absence from live performances and to ensure playing a concert in the United States prior to her Up! Tour, which was to commence in September 2003 in Europe (although it ultimately did so in North America) -> very run-on and difficult to understand. Try to simplify
- Is it fine now? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Still doesn't make sense. The Up! Tour extensively visited the US, so saying that she wanted to guarantee a visit here does't make sense.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yes, but apparently, the tour was at first going to start in Europe, and she wanted to ensure a concert in the US
She said, "With the tour starting in September, I didn't want to miss the summer without staging a concert in the U.S. After living with these 19 songs [from Up!] and going through the recording process, it's time to get on stage and perform them -> I still don't quite understand. She had a tour? Three shows?
- You must clarify for the issues above that the reason she wanted to perform in the US is because she wanted to schedule a concert during the summer. You didn't write that. Now it kind of makes sense.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
maintain it in an energized spirit -> re-word
- Done.
Okay, so as of the first paragraph, I am unclear as whether she was on a regular tour, or the three shows, or anything. A lot needs to be clarified
crossover history that could expand on the number of viewers -> expand? re-word
- Done.
The concert was attended by over 50,000 people -> Was it free? This sentence begins the same as the previous one. Also, refrain from these choppt sentences
- Yes, it was free. It was in the first sentence of the second paragraph. Also, I tried to change "the concert" to "it", but when I did, it seemed kind of unclear as to what "it" was referring to. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - There are many other adjective you could use. That in itself would make reading more concise.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done.

Concert synopsis

in an specific
- Done.
not performed in an specific format from the three studio versions of the album -> you lost me there
- Well, maybe you don't know, but Up! was released under three formats: Blue (World music), Green (Country), and Red (Pop). It was all in one packaging, but with multiple CDs. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
ended with the performance "I'm Gonna Getcha Good!"
- Done.
Concluding with the performance -> a
- Done.
proceeded to terminate the show -> lol, terminate is a bit harsh
- Lol. Yeah, when I put it, I thought of Terminator. What about "ceased"? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - How about just 'end' lol.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done.

Release

date of August 19, 2003 was specified -> announced?
- The word "announced" is used in the previous sentence. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Lol. But its still not the proper word. Try another :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Immediately after the concert's conclusion, -> not he right wording
- - What about now? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 00:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A New Day... Live in Las Vegas -> link
- There is no link. There articles for specials from her residency shows, but it's not the same. This was a live broadcast, and there's no link for it. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

had not attended a concert of Twain's, nor had seen the television special, and was awed by the singer's stage presence -> If he didn't watch it or attend, then how did he review it?
- He reviewed the home release
  - The television special is the home release, just not seen on television. Its still a television special. Also, you would have to make that clear.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yes. It is done. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 00:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That second sentence needs punctuation and heavy clean-up
- Is it fine now? It still seems run on to me. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Not that it's run-on, but it doesn't read well. Alter opinion, leaving them to realize. These are not flowing prose.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Chris Jones of the BBC
- That's what it says. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I know. Its incorrect. The would be if you spell it out. When you have it abbreviated, it doesn't make sense.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done.
noted the band's differences from that of a usual country band and expressed his desire for a more country-influenced sound. -> repetitious; also, I honestly don't completely follow
- Is it clearer? I think so, but I don't think it is less repetitious. It still says "country" twice, but I don't think there's a way to evade that. Any suggestions? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Somewhat, yes. Maybe "southern"? "And was left wanting" is better.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Southern is not same thing as country. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 00:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Twain's working of the audience in her inimitable style -> Twain's working? what does this mean?
- IDK, this is probably the worst article I've ever written. Lol, changed it. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Lol. Don't worry. We'll fix it :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
the video was "far from sterile experience" -> a
- Done.
her then-new son -> newly-born. 'New' sounds like she bought him
- LMAFO! was gonna put that, but he was like 1 or 2 at the time. That's not newly-born. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Lol. We still can't leave it at "then-new song".--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Eja isn't a song. lol What about then-infant? or just son? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 00:06, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
backing band's -> What's the difference between band and backing band?
- None. I changed it to just "band".
fourteen weeks aboard the chart -> It's not on a ship
- Or is it? haha. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Done.
for shipments
- Done.
for the sales of -> Either 'For the sale of' or 'For sales of'. Also, isn't it shipments?
- Picked one List of music recording certifications says its sales for videos in Brazil. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Same for below
- Same.

Sources

I'm not sure if you are aware, but printed newspapers require the "Cite news" template, which automatically has the publisher appear in parenthesis. This is needed for the first four references etc. Also, some of the works are a bit off. Instead of ARIA.com.au, it would be better to just list it as ARIA Charts. Also, ABPD.org.br isn't needed, as the publisher is ABPD spelled out. There are several of these instances.
- Yes, but the printed sources are used. The online articles are. As far as the work and publisher parameters, I think it is pretty much open to interpretation. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 22:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - That latter is fine, but you still need to update the templates. Those are printed sources.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:49, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done.

Comments

I'm placing the article on hold for seven days. Feel free to ask for an extension if needed and appropriate. If you have any queries, questions or any such thing, don't hesitate to ask them here, I have watch-listed this page. Good luck!--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 11:53, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Round Two

I am going to re-read the article and post still-lingering issues here, so there is less confusion.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 20:14, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

You have to give more of an introduction to the tour. You just go off "It differed from the", which leaves me puzzled
Behind-the-scenes footage was filmed in the same week, when Twain visited local landmarks and events -> was filmed during the same week, and features footage of Twain visiting
- Done.
over 8.87 million viewers. Thus, it became the second-most-viewed -> over 8.87 million viewers, becoming the second-most-viewed
- Done.
high ratings on television -> high television ratings
on the the television
- Done.
I have an issue with the lead sentence that discusses its reception. You should give a full sentence on both its positive and negative aspects (interaction, however some questioned her singing etc.)
- Done.
for shipment of 100,000 copies -> s
- Done.
Excerpts from Up! Close and Personal were used as the music videos -> Mashed up clips, or the actual performance of the song?
- Actual performances, but excerpts can be both. It's specified in the release section if anything. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 03:25, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Background

concert, Twain performed a series of three outdoor concerts -> try not repeating obvious wording within such close proximity
- Done.
and to ensure playing a concert in the United States prior to her Up! Tour -> This doesn't make sense. Why? The Up Tour did visit the US
At the time, it was to commence in September 2003 in Europe, although it ultimately did so in North America -> don't quite follow
stating she preferred -> that
with a setlist of twenty-two songs -> composed of
- Done.
The singer, the singer -> try mixing it up
- Done.
music special, and reached out to Twain about filming the concert, which she accepted -> re-write
- Done.
NBC executives sought Twain due to her being a well-established artist with a lengthy career and crossover history that could draw in more viewers -> Due to her being? Re-write
- Done.
a program specialized to feed children in America -> I didn't know programs specialize in anything
- What do you mean? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You don't mention the concert being filmed and produced by Beth McCarthy-Miller anywhere in the prose
- Done.

Concert synopsis

several hits -> POV
- That's not a POV issue. I've seen countless GA articles call the songs hits. What else would they be called? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The songs from Up! were not performed in a specific format from the three studio versions of the album -> ?
- Did you read the comment I put above? Anyone that knows about the album, knows what that's supposed to mean. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Twain desired to approach the live productions -> desired to approach a song?
- Yes, as an the approach she took. Her method of doing things. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message}
girlfriend -> any other word?
Idk, which one: "love interest", "romantic partner"?
end of the runway -> runway-styled stage
- What?? Most stages have runways. That's not needed. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message}
with the performance -> a
- Done.
performed "No One Needs to Know" playing an -> while
- Done.
Concluding with a performance -> concluding what?
the third and final segment of the concert, the encore -> the encore is not a segment. its an unannounced and unofficial part of the show. ust say she returned for the encore
- It's not really unofficial. Most artists have a set encore that they do every single show. I don't really get why it's called the encore though. I always thought the same. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Release

The July 27, 2003 concert at Grant Park was announced along with Up! Live in Chicago -> doesn't make sense
- I get you. What I mean is that it was announced and they said that it was going to be taped for a special. I re-wrote it, but don't think it makes much of a difference. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
and received high ratings -> any source for this?
- Yes. Does becoming the second most watched concert movie on TV count as high ratings? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Up! Live in Chicago was also source to multiple media for singles from Up! -> re-write
- I think it's fine. It gets more in detail in the next sentences, so I don't believe it needs to be changed. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception

You exaggerate the critical quotes from reviewers: "was awed by the singer's stage presence" -> all he said was she seemed "comfortable" on stage
- Yeah, when I wrote it, I was in a hurry and couldn't really think of another word. What about "surprised"? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
make Twain's naysayers alter their perception of her, making them realize -> its a dragging idea. Trim it down
- Done.
noted the band's differences from that of a usual country band and wanted a more country-influenced sound -> so vague
- The section is big as is. I really didn't want to make it longer by going into detail with that. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Twain's incorporation of the audience -> Um, you don't incorporate an audience. They are there....
- The reviewer said that. And yes, you can incorporate the audience in your performances. It's not too common to see artists bring their fans onstage and stuff. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
naming it her "inimitable style" -> doesn't make sense with the above quote
- Which quote? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message}
then-new son, Eja -> again, has to be changed
- See above. I gave options. Don't really know which one to chose. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
He complimented the band's strong, yet rote efforts -> what?
- The reviewer also says this: "Twain's nine-member backing band delivered strong but rote renditions of her hits" -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This section need significant trimming and grammar fixes

Commercial performance

In Brazil, In Austria
- What about it? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 04:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There you go :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 03:13, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pass - You've made sufficient changes to the article. Well done IPN :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 13:00, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Up! Live in Chicago. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 21:18, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]