Wikipedia:Featured article review/Adore (album)/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was delisted by DrKay via FACBot (talk) 8:57, 20 February 2021 (UTC) [1].
Review section
[edit]Hey all. This article was promoted to Fa back in 2007, and it has depreciated a lot over time. I raised concerns on its talk page earlier this month and no one gave any input. While I took care of a few issues before I raised concerns, the article still has a lot of issues that I raised there. – zmbro (talk) 19:03, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Zmbro I am not seeing that the notifications (as listed) were done? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:25, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- SandyGeorgia Done. Very sorry about that! – zmbro (talk) 23:52, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm unconvinced that several of these sources are reliable, including Addicted to Noise, Smashing Pumpkings Fan Collaborative, Smashingpumpkinsnexus.com. There's also rather heavy use of primary source material from band members Corgan and Aronoff. Hog Farm Talk 00:29, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree. I also noted in ref 2 (which isn't an actual ref) just states "The primary source on the recording climate is a three-part blog written by Billy Corgan in 2005, all three of which are referenced extensively in the body of this article." I don't believe FAs should be self-referential. – zmbro (talk) 16:34, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, I agree on that. It's going to be fixable, as we appear to have the actual Corgan refs to compare, but how much should we really rely on primary source Corgan? There's a lot of work needed here, and it's too far out of my wheelhouse to do this personally. Hog Farm Talk 16:38, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Same here. Before I made comments on its talk page I fixed a few things on my own, including moving refs out of the infobox and modernizing the charts section (before). While I'm a fan of 90s-Pumpkins, I don't have much access to anything non-website related, so I can't be of much assistance in that department. – zmbro (talk) 17:38, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, I agree on that. It's going to be fixable, as we appear to have the actual Corgan refs to compare, but how much should we really rely on primary source Corgan? There's a lot of work needed here, and it's too far out of my wheelhouse to do this personally. Hog Farm Talk 16:38, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC, zero improvement (one bot edit) since nomination. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:14, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to FARC - Issues identified above, and no significant improvements. Hog Farm Talk 16:20, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
FARC section
[edit]- Issues raised in the review section include sourcing and coverage. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:53, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist, no significant work since 7 January. Femke Nijsse (talk) 20:44, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist, no work on improvement whatsoever. I would also like to point out that the "personnel" section is entirely unsourced. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 05:27, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist would need considerable improvements to meet the criteria (t · c) buidhe 09:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delist - no substantive improvements have been made to correct the issues during the course of this FAR. Hog Farm Talk 13:59, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. DrKay (talk) 18:57, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.