Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hi-5 (Australian band)/archive1

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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 00:51, 30 July 2016 [1].

Hi-5 (Australian band)

Nominator(s): SatDis (talk) 08:21, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the Australian children's musical group formed in 1998, which is associated with the children's television series of the same name. The brand has produced numerous television series, music albums, worldwide tours and merchandise. Hi-5 were one of Australia's highest paid entertainment entities, placing in the Business Review Weekly's annual list several times, earning an estimated A$18million in 2009. The membership has changed several times. SatDis (talk) 08:25, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Cas Liber

Taking a look now - will jot queries below: Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:59, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~developed the series as a contemporary form of preschool entertainment,...~~ ~~suspect "contemporary" is redundant as we're not gonna be talking about historical preschool entertainment are we? In fact "form of" is then redundant as well...~~

~~incorporating educational trends with an appeal for all ages~~ ~~- I am not sure what this means, you mean appealing to adults as well as preschoolers? Also, this sentence not supported by the source.~~

~~where she realised that children are the same around the world, and decided the show would appeal universally, with accessible themes such as family and animals~~ - I don't see the source talking about similarities of kids around the world, and she can't "decide" that it will appeal universally as that is up to the consumers. Also there is no mention of family and animals in the source.

~~The show is kept contemporary so that these themes relate to the current world of children, with the producers keeping in touch with the audience~~ ~~- waffly, why not just, "Harris strove to incorporate items of current interest to children to keep them interested in the show" or somesuch..~~

~~It is confusing referring to Kelli as Crawford and not Hoggart as she was the latter for much of this period.~~

~~however the original cast was so strong that the Australian series was sold overseas instead~~ ~~- needs to be reworded to reflect Harris' POV - something like "Harris was so confident in the original cast that the Australian series was sold overseas instead~~

The prose is pretty puffy in many places and needs to be tightened, with segments such as "Hi-5 has a distinguishable pop music sound" and "The Hi-5 members took their passion for creating change and ensuring happiness for children worldwide beyond the stage and screen" removed entirely. I have concerns about the sourcing. I fear this will need quite a bit of work. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:24, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More:

Another inspiration for Harris was watching pop group, the Spice Girls - a bit repetitive. why not just, "Harris also recalled watching pop group, the Spice Girls..." (as inspiration is implied)

Harris stated that the energy of the group was fast paced and that physical interaction was encouraged - physical interaction between who? the kids? the band and kids? the band and each other? I'd be tempted to remove this line altogether actually...

Comments from Dweller

There are some places in the text where I'm unclear whether "Hi5" refers to the band or the TV programme or both
Some inconsistency over whether Hi5 is singular "Hi-5 was created" or plural "Hi-5 are an Australian children's musical group". This may be linked to my previous point, which makes it more serious. I appreciate that ENGVAR means you may wish to refer to a band in singular or plural, but not both.
Timeline looks awkward. I'd expect to see the original members grouped, then the first to join, then the next etc.
Too many gushy self-praising quoteboxes in a bunch in the middle of the article for me

--Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 13:04, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply from SatDis

Thankyou @Casliber: and @Dweller: for taking a look. I am aware this is the first attempt at a feature article review so I am not expecting immediate results.

@Casliber:

I have taken on your suggestions and done a bit of editing - changed "decided" to "expected", etc.
About children being the same around the world, the reference was actually on the second page of the source. The source is actually referenced several times in the article, would those need to be split into different references for the two pages of the source?
Again, the family and animals was on the second page. Might need to add the second page as a new reference?
I'm sure that using Crawford would be more generally accepted, as it would seem strange to shift surnames throughout the article?
If you fear this might take a lot of work, that's fine, but I am willing to put in some work. This band is actually very challenging to research.

@Dweller:

Trying to distinguish between the band and the TV program was one of the main goals of the good article review. As the page is about the band, references to the TV show are minimal, but of course they are essential because the two are closely linked. Generally when Hi-5 is italicised, it is referring to the TV show. It should always be "are" rather than "is" anyway and there is no "is" in the prose.
The timeline actually shows the succession of which member replaced who. I originally had it with the original members grouped, but there was a large push to change that for some reason.
As for the self-praising text boxes, we found there is limited information on Hi-5 as a whole which doesn't come from the group or producers themselves. Do you have any preferences as to which boxes should be cut or edited?

SatDis (talk) 09:21, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean about the italicising. I think that's asking a lot of the reader to notice such a thing. As you say you're mainly referring to the TV show, why not discard references to the TV show's name and use "the TV show" or similar instead?

It's not just "is" and "are". It's any singular/plural. I gave an example of a singular already: "Hi-5 was created". But if that's the TV show, it's tangled into the previous point.

Re chart, strange, but OK.

Any (and cut them). It makes the page look like promotional material for the band.

--Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 11:10, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dweller: Yes, the "was" stems from references to the TV show. Understood that it is demanding of the reader to notice this. I have changed a few of the Hi-5 references to the TV show or similar. Granted, the remaining italicised references clearly refer to the TV show in the surrounding sentences.

Agreed on the promotional-esque material. I am biased due to being a fan. I have trimmed the quotes to remove any self praising words. I have cut it down to information that enhances what the prose is saying. SatDis (talk) 06:13, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine, I'm a fan of much of the stuff I've written FAs about, too. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 07:26, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, have struck out my points - missed page two. Will be back to look at it more. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:21, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions taken on board. Physical interaction removed etc. Thankyou for the feedback; it is always good to have new eyes read the page. SatDis (talk) 12:59, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment -- This has been open a month and a half without achieving any clear support for promotion so I'm going to archive it. I'd recommend putting it up for Peer Review and inviting anyone who's commented here and at the GAN -- and also relevant Wikiprojects via their talk pages -- to look it over. When that's done -- or a minimum two weeks from now, whichever is longer -- feel free to renominate here; when you do that, it's fine to leave neutrally worded notes that the article is up for FAC on the talk pages of the people who've previously commented. Good luck! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:50, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 00:51, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.