Wikipedia:Featured article review/The Orb/archive1

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 Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 3:52, 9 January 2021 (UTC) [1].

The Orb

Notified: Wickethewok, Kingboyk, WikiProject The KLF, WikiProject The KLF, WikiProject Electronic music

Review section

I am nominating this featured article for review because...

The article's FA nominator and main contributor has edited Wikipedia very sparsely in the last years and their last contribution to The Orb was way back in 2011. The article is severely out of date and does not meet current FA standards. We have a Talk page notice from March with a direct ping to the nominator that went unanswered.

The Orb is a very prolific group with 16 studio albums to their name. Their last album to be covered in a significant way in the article (with analysis of the production, comparison to previous albums and commentary about the group's career progression - expected minimum) is their seventh, Okie Dokie, from 2005 - which roughly coincides with the article's promotion to FA. Then we have a subsection called "2007-present" that covers 13 years and at least nine studio albums (I imagine there is significant other work in the mix other than the studio albums, ie. collabs) in a very messy and superficial way:

stubby paragraphs (single sentences);
unsourced information;
no analysis whatsoever of several of their albums - "On 22 June 2018, The Orb released their fifteenth studio album No Sounds Are Out of Bounds." - The only mention of their 15th album in the article is this, the release date. There isn't a single mention of the 12th, 13th or 14th studio albums in the text. At all.

Then there's other (comparatively minor) stuff such as:

dubious websites used as sources

Backsideoftheorb is a fan site: "Thanks to all the Orbies out there, but especially...";
TransitKings.com, has been dead since at least 2007. We also shouldn't be using primary sources to document on a band's difficulties in releasing an album, we use secondary sources for that;

Ref 20 is not a ref, it's an unsourced note (/quote?);
Ref 77 is not formatted.

But yeah, the main issue here is the 13 years of career that are not documented in a comprehensive way. Failure of 1 b). RetiredDuke (talk) 11:56, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Lazman312

The Orb is interesting in the fact that the beginning of the article starts out pretty good. Throughout most of the history section, it is readable and well-detailed. However, the last sub-section of the history section is terrible. In the subsection, The Dream, Baghdad Batteries (Orbsessions Volume III), and The Orbserver in the Star House (Albums 8, 9, and 10) do have some analysis. But:

There is only a brief or lackluster mention of Metallic Spheres, No Sounds Are Out of Bounds, and Abolition of the Royal Familia (Albums 10, 15, and 16).
There is no mention of More Tales from the Orbservatory, Moonbuilding 2703 AD, and COW / Chill Out, World! (Albums 12, 13, and 14).
Most of the "paragraphs" if you can call them that are one-line paragraphs and are stubby.
They are also often unsourced.

Besides the problems within the last subsection of the history section, some other problems include:

No personnel section
The last paragraph in the lead is one sentence long.
Citation 15's text before the acutal reference is improperly formatted.
Citation 20 is an unsourced footnote.
Citation 77 is incorrectly formatted.
Citation 97 is not a reliable source, especially for reviews.

Those are just my two cents on the article. ~~I will be using the citation bot on the article.~~ Lazman321 (talk) 18:54, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Move to FARC~~, not a single edit since nomination. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:12, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hold, per Laser, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:40, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I feel like this is rescueable as pop culture sources are readily available and it's easy to see where the article fell into disrepair. I'm willing to clean up the proseline, update the article, and address the other issues. I'm not going to hold my breath for help since Kingboyk hasn't edited in months, but if you happen to see this, are you willing to tag-team it? --Laser brain (talk) 17:35, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Laser brain:, nothing is happening here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:19, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Move to FARC, zero edits, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:31, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FARC section

Issues raised in the review section include currency and sourcing. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:13, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unlikely to have much time to work on it until around the 20th of this month. If there is a wish to move it through this process before then, I won't object. --Laser brain (talk) 03:21, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Laser brain: that's fine. Happy to be flexible with time if people offer to help Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:21, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Casliber and Laser brain:, Laser has not edited since 10 December. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:58, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(sigh) we-ell, if people would opine in this section we can act upon it....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:35, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@RetiredDuke: what's your take on where this stands? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:55, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there have been no edits since nomination, so RetiredDuke update is not needed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:57, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delist, issues not addressed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:57, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delist the article was submitted to FAR two months ago, it still looks the same. RetiredDuke (talk) 18:06, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delist - Per above. GamerPro64 06:22, 8 January 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. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:52, 9 January 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.