Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Waterboys
Self-nom This article was created February 16 2004 as a stub (and still uses some of the original wording), was expanded significantly by User:O'Dubhghaill, whose work created a fine article, and forms the basis of the article as it is now. After a couple of months of work from me, I listed it at Peer Review for a few weeks, until User:TUF-KAT suggested a few minutes ago that it was ready for here. I believe the article to be article to meet the FA criteria, including the challenging one of being comprehensive without getting into trivia. I look forward to feedback. Jkelly 06:48, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Comment: The section about the members is mainly a list when it has enough content to be in prose.Johnleemk | Talk 06:51, 1 December 2005 (UTC)- It was originally in small paragraphs. User:FuriousFreddy formatted it as a bullet list during the Peer Review. I have a slight aesthetic preference for it, but it should certainly be changed if consensus is that it is an inappropriate use of list formatting. Jkelly 06:58, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Johnleemk | Talk 09:38, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
- It was originally in small paragraphs. User:FuriousFreddy formatted it as a bullet list during the Peer Review. I have a slight aesthetic preference for it, but it should certainly be changed if consensus is that it is an inappropriate use of list formatting. Jkelly 06:58, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
- Support,
with a few quibbles: Tuf-Kat 08:47, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
The band members have been largely from the British Isles, and the group has been based out of London and Dublin. Is it just me or is that an odd tense for that sentence? Is it a British thing?I think the band members can make ordinary-sized paragraphs and would look better that way.I don't think "An anonymous writer on the Academy of American Poets' website" sounds like a very good source for an encyclopedia article.There's no mention of chart performance that I can see. If they've never charted, that should be mentioned. I'm not one to focus on chart rankings, but they should be included.
- 1) Did this edit improve it? 2) Done. 3) That was a nudge from User:Mel Etitis to research that source. I had forgotten. The footnote now explains the article's origin. 4) I included a couple of lines about their best chart positions. More detailed chart information is in the album articles. I can expand further if you feel it is still lacking. All good catches, thanks. Jkelly 21:44, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for being responsive! Tuf-Kat 23:40, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
- 1) Did this edit improve it? 2) Done. 3) That was a nudge from User:Mel Etitis to research that source. I had forgotten. The footnote now explains the article's origin. 4) I included a couple of lines about their best chart positions. More detailed chart information is in the album articles. I can expand further if you feel it is still lacking. All good catches, thanks. Jkelly 21:44, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Filiocht | The kettle's on 08:25, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
Mild Object: great band, good article. However, I agree that the "An anonymous writer on the Academy of American Poets" quote is not quite what I'd expect. Even worse is "The album helped to increase the growing popularity of Irish music. World Music: The Rough Guide notes that "some cynics claim that Scotsman Mike Scott gave Irish music back to the Irish... his impact can't be underestimated" is an extraordinary statement. I know it's sourced, but the Rough Guide is just plain wrong. We Irish had being doing a fine job reviving our own music since at least the mid 1960s, thank you very much. Now a claim like this on articles on The Bothy Band, Sean O Riada, The Chieftans, Planxty, The Dubliners, The Clancy Brothers, Christy Moore, or countless more might hold water, but not here. If anything, immersion in the very live tradition helped Scott (re)connect with his own Celtic identity; the claim in the article is, as I said already, sourced but wrong. Which makes one nervous about other claims in the article. Certainly, anyone who knows their Irish music will be, at best, amused to read this particular statement. Filiocht | The kettle's on 14:23, 1 December 2005 (UTC)- See above response to User:TUF-KAT for the "anonymous writer" thing. I'm curious what should be done about your "sourced but wrong" complaint. You'll notice I didn't go over to Irish music and include the quote there, but it is certainly a notable comment about the band. Does it need to be made more clear to the reader that the authors of World Music: the Rough Guide do not themselves source the "cynics" who make the claim they are reporting? I am fairly confident that I can find a quote from Scott that says that the (pre-existing) vibrant Irish music Wickham introduced him to deeply inspired him, and include that as a counter-point to the "impact can't be underestimated" line. Would this work for you? Jkelly 21:44, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, much better. I've changed my vote now. Filiocht | The kettle's on 08:25, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
- See above response to User:TUF-KAT for the "anonymous writer" thing. I'm curious what should be done about your "sourced but wrong" complaint. You'll notice I didn't go over to Irish music and include the quote there, but it is certainly a notable comment about the band. Does it need to be made more clear to the reader that the authors of World Music: the Rough Guide do not themselves source the "cynics" who make the claim they are reporting? I am fairly confident that I can find a quote from Scott that says that the (pre-existing) vibrant Irish music Wickham introduced him to deeply inspired him, and include that as a counter-point to the "impact can't be underestimated" line. Would this work for you? Jkelly 21:44, 1 December 2005 (UTC)