Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Bolt Thrower/archive1

Bolt Thrower
This article displays a complete overview of the death metal band Bolt Thrower.

Selfnomination.

Spearhead 09:59, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * It's good, I like it, although I'm not sure it's quite ready for featured status. Looks like there are a few things that could be reworded and refined. I'd love to see an article like this on the main page, though. Everyking 18:19, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Uh, hi. If you don't provide a bit more detail on what you think is deficient, there is nothing the nominator can do to fix the article. - Taxman 03:39, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. I'm not a thrash metal fan. If I'm gonna read an article on a thrash band, I need some kinda hook to grab my interest.  The tabletop angle sounds interesting; it needs to be treated more thoroughly.  Is an interest in tabletop gaming common in hardcore bands?  If not, that makes them unique; say so.  If yes, do Bolt Thrower take it further?  We need more specifics about how, if at all, the gaming thing makes their lyrics/music stand out from other bands of the same genre.  It's interesting that they're not just fanboys, but they've actually had Games Workshop sponsorship.  That should be in the introduction.  Does GW do that kind of thing commonly, or was this a unique deal?  Other than that, all I'll say is that the prose could use some polishing in places.


 * I made this a bit more clear. Altho for a music article the musical interest should be the main interest. I do acknowledge tho that some ppl got into them because of the game. Spearhead 16:44, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Object. 1) Needs sound sample(s) to hear what the band actually sounds like. 2) Needs a photo of the band itself. 3) No references (although some of the ext. links may qualify as such). 4) Needs a copyedit for style and POV (cite the source). Some samples: "They did not feel quite happy", "And now in 2004", "and also because his hair fell out", "sounds very much Bolt Thrower", "a bit more hardcorish", "the heaviest label ever at that time", "the band's quality can be heard in some songs", etc. 5) The article should give an idea of the following of the band (how large, how international, maybe some sales figures?) Also, citing some professional reviews might be useful. 6) The related bands section should be integrated in the article. If there were bands that influenced Bolt Thrower, mention them in article; same for bands that were influence by Bolt Thrower. 7) It seems a redundant to have a line-up section when all line-ups are mentioned in the history. Also, the band members should be linked when first mentioned. Jeronimo 07:57, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * 1) Added a link to one song 2) done 3) added BTFAQ as reference. added some books. 4) fixed most of the mentioned stuff plus some other. 5) record sales are pretty much irrelevant in this genre. 6) original influences mentioned. will improve this. Furthermore some bands are mentioned in see also as a sort of similar band 7) The lineup provides a clear overview of bandmembers and has some more detail, similar to the discography. band member *were* linked. Spearhead 16:44, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I'll have to look at the rest later on, but re 5): if sales are irrelevant for the genre, why does the article start out with "becoming one of the best selling bands on that label"? Anyway, my main point was to get a picture of the size and shape of the following of the band. Record sales *might* be a way to do so, but it's certainly not the only way (see above). I think this is essential for the article. Jeronimo 08:06, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * it was one way to more or less satifisfy one of your objections. I might go on and discuss tours, venue size and ticket sale states etc.


 * Object. No references, a basic featured article criterion. Please make sure the article you nominate meets all of the basic criteria before nominating it. That is simple courtesy to the editors you are asking to consider your article. - Taxman 14:07, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * fixed Spearhead 17:05, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Adding references after the fact is potentially problematic. Can you confirm to what extent you used the listed references to add or verify material in the article? - Taxman 21:44, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Taxman, I'm a bit confused here. You asked for references, something our (relatively) new user was not really aware of. As you requested for his references, which he duly added (and he wrote most of the article) exactly what do you want him to do? This request sounds bloody unreasonable. - Ta bu shi da yu 23:28, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I expect exactly what I just requested, that he properly used them to add or confirm material in the article. The problem that others have correctly pointed out with references added to an article after the request for such has been made is that someone simply added a list of works about the subject and did not actually use them properly.  So it is entirely reasonable to ask the editor to confirm that they did use them properly. And for the record, I did not "ask for references", I objected to this article being featured because it had none. - Taxman 16:24, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * All right, but here's the thing: you did request them when you objected to having no references because all objections must be actionable. The very fact you object to no references is an implied request he adds them as he must act on most reasonable objections. I'm not arguing that your objection is unreasonable, I feel it's unreasonable to object to the references, then have the original author add them and then object that he added them! - Ta bu shi da yu 00:46, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I didn't object that he added them. As stated a number of times already, I asked him to confirm to what extent he added them properly, which has, as of yet, not been done. It is a very important distinction. References added without being used are entirely unnaceptable, as has been pointed out to me by other authors numerous times. - Taxman 13:42, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)


 * object. I just fixed some bad wordings in the lead and the first section, but the whole article still needs work (examples: It seemed that they hardly knew what death metal would be -- who does the they refer to, The production of this piece was not great, though it was an improvement on previous attempt. -- pluralization, After Games Workshop heard the recording of the songs for Bolt Thrower's second Peel session, which was recorded on 6 November 1988, they offered Bolt Thrower to do the expensive artwork for the album, which the band accepted. -- bad link format, run-on sentence, ambiguous pronoun, poor English in "offered to do the expensive artwork").  There are POV problems as well, in the bald claim that Vinyl Solutions did not know what death metal "would be", in the claims about quality of production, about how ingenius some songs are -- these claims need to be attributed to one of the sources cited in the references section.  The "related bands" section needs to go (if they're related, they should be in the body of the article with an explanation of how they're related).  The see also section is unnecessary, since both links are already in the article.  Needs sound samples (in the wiki, not in an external link). Tuf-Kat 22:16, Jan 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * considering Vinyl Solution; the statement is not so bold as it may seem. We're speaking of 1988 here and the first death metal album ever was released only in 1987. Moreover, as stated in the article, VS was a pure hardcore label. Spearhead 17:05, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Another needed tweak: song titles go in quotes, and albums in italics. Tuf-Kat 00:24, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)


 * Object - we still need a copyedit. I started, but I'll continue. Most of the other things have been fixed up, and this is an interesting article. This is almost ready, I feel. - Ta bu shi da yu 23:33, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)