Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/His Band and the Street Choir/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 not promoted by Karanacs 14:47, 25 May 2010 [1].

His Band and the Street Choir

Nominator(s): Kitchen roll (talk) 17:36, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because I think it meets the FA criteria. I've already brought it from start class to GA and think it would make a good featured article. I've also had the article peer reviewed and I've had positive feedback. Thanks Kitchen roll (talk) 17:36, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment—no dab links, no dead external links. Ucucha 17:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC)\[reply]

Initial comments. Interesting article. Just a few preliminary comments.

Lead. After reading the article, and re-reading the lead, I thought it rambled a bit. This sentence, The album was originally to be called Virgo's Fool, but for the album's release the name was changed. seemed unnecessary, or at least part of it is. Obviously the name was changed for the Album's release. If you're going to tell us this, then tell us why, but it didn't seem like a big deal. I'd really stick to what makes this album notable: the kinds of music on it, the simplicity of lyrics, the experimental (?) use of a capella plus the band, and other issues. Northern Irish is awkward. What exactly do you mean by that? He's from Northern Ireland?

The Northern Irish description at the start of the article does imply he's Northern Irish (or is ment to anyway). I've seen "English" and "American" used on featured articles, such as Control (Janet Jackson album), The Dark Side of the Moon and The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan. It might not read as well on His Band and the Street Choir because "Northern Irish" is two words. I've also reworded parts. How does it look now? Kitchen roll (talk) 21:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Prose.

(1) You switch verb tenses a lot. Sometimes the album was, sometimes it is. I'd stick to past tense ... The album was recorded.... or even better, Morrison recorded the album...

I've reworded the article mostly to the past tense. I've left the song descriptions in the present tense because the recordings are still as they were forty years ago. Kitchen roll (talk)

(2) On the subject of verbs, you could really strengthen the prose by using more "active" (opposed to "passive") tense. Morrison recorded. The band played, the musicians sang, Morrison said, claimed, complained, etc. The album attained, reached, demonstrated, ....

I think I've adressed the issue Kitchen roll (talk)

(3) There is a lot of jargon here. The album "charted".... I know what you mean, but someone reading this who is unfamiliar with the jargon will have trouble.

reworded Kitchen roll (talk)

(4) Ambiguities/logic. The album was retitled before its release, from Virgo's Fool to His Band and the Street Choir, which was when Morrison first lost control of the album. Have you put the cart before the horse? Morrison lost control of the album, and (whomever) retitled it from Virgo's Fool to his band.... before its release. Is there a rationale for this?

Just my bad writing. I've reworded this Kitchen roll (talk)

Sources. Not all the sources cited are listed in the bibliography.

I've added the sources to the bibliography. Kitchen roll (talk)

Furthermore, what makes these sources reliable? (I'm not saying they aren't, I just want to know why they are.)

oocities.com. http://www.oocities.com/sfloman/vanmorrison.html#3.

allmusic.com. http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:abfoxqe0ldfe.

rocksbackpages.com

robertchristgau.com

elviscostello.info. http://www.elviscostello.info/articles/t-z/vanity_fair.001101a.html

The allmusic, oocities, Robert Christgau, and rock back pages reviews were all conducted by professional music reviewers. The Elvis Costello site was written by Costello himself, an acclaimed artist in his own right. Kitchen roll (talk)

Suggestions: I suggest doing another copy edit on it, just to fix some of the prose ambiguities. If you don't feel up to it, then perhaps check with someone at the Guild of Copyeditors—there is a elimination drive going on right now but someone will probably get right on it. Certainly it needs someone who is uninvolved to read it, as well. Interesting article, and I look forward to supporting it eventually. Auntieruth55 (talk) 18:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

1. 9, #32 --> should be number nine and number 32 per WP:MOSNUM.
The tables used in the Charts section aren't standard, use this as a reference instead.

Right I've changed the charts Kitchen roll (talk)

That Oocities review is not reliable. Is Scott Floman a reputed critic? Does Oocities have a record of publishing noteworthy music criticism? I suspect he's just a fan posting his reviews on the Internet (correct me if I'm wrong).

Scott Floman is music critic for Goldmine (magazine): http://sfloman.com/faq.html; http://www.disclaimerband.com/musiclinks.html. Kitchen roll (talk)

Why do you devote a one-paragraph block quote to the Rolling Stone review? It may be perceived as bias; especially when there are equally reputable publications (Village Voice, CREEM) also reviewed the album. Also, why don't you quote the CREEM review?

Haven't used Creem review in prose because there's nothing to quote. Also I haven't used Village Voice in prose because I didn't know a review of the album was available. Where can I find it? Kitchen roll (talk)

Avoid 'spring'/'summer' as they indicate different times in the Southern Hemisphere. Could you use actual dates instead?

The article uses spring and summer, because the source Can You Feel the Silence? uses spring and summer and doesn't give specific dates. Kitchen roll (talk)

Can that paragraph where you name every session musician on the album be trimmed? No offense, but it simply doesn't make for very interesting reading for the general reader. Besides, this is why the Personnel section exists anyway.
Overall I don't feel a narrative coming through; the sentences and paragraphs are a little choppy, and do not flow very well. Compare with In Utero or Loveless, which I consider to be model featured articles.
For example, the first and third paragraphs of Recording are confusing to me. First off, the body of the article should stand independently of the lead, so you should introduce the Street Choir again. Why he wanted to use them should appear right up front as well. Also, the entire section on Recording doesn't mention that he used a backing band on the songs. Why is his unhappiness with the Street Choir songs mentioned twice in successive sentences?

I've reworded the whole section. Kitchen roll (talk)

"Rolling Stone reviewer Jon Landau believed the song is an excellent way to end the album." - that is subjective opinion, which should be in the Reception section, not in Composition.

Wikipedia:Wikiproject albums says reviews of songs in the composition sections of album articles are acceptable. Kitchen roll (talk)

"His Band and the Street Choir was intended to be released in time for Christmas 1970; therefore there was little discussion over the album's packaging." - not seeing the corelation . . . If the album was completed in Summer, wouldn't there be plenty of time till Christmas?—indopug (talk)

It takes a long time for albums to be produced, there's mixing, packaging, promotion etc, so I'd say getting the album out in November from being finished in late summer is pretty quick. Kitchen roll (talk)

Oppose - sorry I don't think the prose is FA standard and I agree with Auntieruth in that another copy-edit would be valuable. There are redundances and ambiguities. Here are some examples:

Here, "because at first it was not intended to amount to anything" - perhaps "be released" or "used on the final recording" might be better than the vague "amount to anything".
"a couple of" should be "two".
Here, "For this demo session three musicians were brought back from the Moondance sessions", For this demo session is redundant; the reader has already knows this from the line or two above.
"In order to" - spot the redundancy.
Here, "trumpeter Keith Johnson, contributed organ to the recording" - how about a simpler "played organ on"? And what sort of organ was it?
More redundancy here "For this recording session Morrison wanted..." - just say Morrison wanted....
There is jargon here, "He was unhappy with the songs cut with the choir"; cut should be recorded.
This sentence is a snake and needs to be shortened or cut up, "These songs were rewritten both lyrically and musically for their release on His Band and the Street Choir, because the original recordings featured different instrumentation and personnel to the band Morrison had assembled to record his new album."
"before" is better than "prior to".
More redundancy "rhythm guitar chords", why add chords?
Still more redundancy, "Horn overdubs were later added to the track".
There is some over-linking, piano for example.
This needs more explanation, "His Band and the Street Choir was intended to be released in time for Christmas 1970; therefore there was little discussion over the album's packaging". Only use "therefore" when the reason has been fully explained or is obvious from the context.

This is an interesting article but some more work remains to be done. Graham Colm (talk) 13:40, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've sorted what you've suggested about the prose (correct me if I'm wrong). I've also asked a copyeditor if they'd look over the article, so hopefully they'll identify some of my mistakes. I'll also have another look for improvements that can be made. Kitchen roll (talk) 19:49, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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