Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Genesis (band)

Genesis (band)
This is a self nomination for an article on Genesis, an English progressive rock band. The article has gone through a peer review and suggestions arising from PR discussions have been incorporated into the article. AreJay 18:48, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I have a question. In the band's info box, the pic shows several people. But under members, there are only two listed. --Osbus 14:56, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The picture in the infobox is the band's original lineup. The two people listed are the only ones who are known to have not "left" Genesis. Everyone else has left/been dismissed. Hope this helps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D-Day (talk • contribs)
 * D-Day is almost right. The two people listed (Tony Banks and Mike Rutherford) are the only ones known to have not "left" Genesis. The image, though, is not the original lineup; it is however the lineup that made Genesis famous and the lineup that progressive rock fans are most likely to identify Genesis with. Hope this helps. AreJay 15:22, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Wow. Thanks for correcting me. I knew that too. Guess I need to put away my U2 and Soundtrack of Our Lives CDs and listen to these guys full-time again. :? --D-Day(Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?) 15:24, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * There is a past members field, you should use it. See Brilliant (band) for an example. Currently according to the infobox Genesis is and always has been a duo. --kingboyk 14:31, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I hadn't noticed the "past-members" variable in the template. Past members have been added to the infobox now! AreJay 14:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * "Some audiences were unable to appreciate Gabriel's theatrics." - sounds rather biased to me.... Just another star in the night T 23:28, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm going to have to disagree there. This sentence is from the Criticism section. Most critiques are based on opinions and not on facts. Valid or invalid, this is an opinion that many listeners of Genesis hold, and should therefore be represented in the article. AreJay 23:54, 23 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Even still, if you're going to assert general opinion, it still requires a citation or a reference. Find a credible source from a magazine, newspaper, or some other music guide to substantiate claims such as the one above. Wisdom89 17:00, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Makes sense. I am in the process of locating a corresponding reference. AreJay 18:59, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I have added the appropriate reference. Actually, I had already added the references a few sentences down since those sentences pertained to the same topic. I have now added the same in-line reference to the above mentioned statement. AreJay 21:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Image concerns.  Two are sourced only to a defunct FTP server, giving us no information on the copyright holder.  Taking random images from a fileserver because one likes them fails Fair use.  Two other images look very much like scans of posters, with what looks like permission only from the individual who scanned them.  Scanning an image does not create a new licensing opportunity.  Jkelly 23:32, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I hear you. I will replace the images from the fileserver and the scans. AreJay 23:54, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Only one image was from the defunct FTP server. I scanned the other image from a book (I have updated the source information in the image tag). AreJay 00:00, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I have removed and replaced images with questionable sources or clarified the image source where appropriate. Jkelly, please review. AreJay 00:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Support, comprehensive and well written.I would also sugest adding the PD photos to the Commons and creating a page there.--Fallout boy 05:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I will work on this. Thanks. AreJay 21:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Done! AreJay


 * Conditional Support - The article is good and well structured, but there are a lot of supurlatives. For example, it would be improper to describe "Supper's Ready" as the groups magnum opus - is that song the most famous and popular the group ever did? And saying "Some fans were unable to appreciate Gabriel's theatrics" suggests that it is the fault of the fans for not understanding Gabriel. Do you understand what I mean? This article has a lot of slant for the band, as if to suggest that everything they did was excellent and it is the fault of the listeners if they did not like or enjoy it. Support, all my concerns addressed. TheImpossibleMan 02:48, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I did some online research and it looks like opinion is divided as to whether or not "Supper's Ready" was indeed their magnum opus. Some fans and critics feel that that title belongs to the 1975 concept album The Lamb Lies down on Broadway. I have therefore replaced that phrase. As far as the sentence about Gabriel's theatrics, now that you mention it, it does sound rather POV, although I did not mean for the sentence to be construed this way. I have removed that sentence as well. I am currently reviewing the article for subtle phrases or sentences that might convey a slant towards the band. I'll get back with you once that's done. Thanks for taking the time to review the article! AreJay 03:49, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I have cleaned up some of the verbiage that was giving the impression that it was the audiences fault that they couldn't understand Gabriel's theatrics. I have tried to eliminate "slant" towards the band as well. Please let me know if this works. AreJay 16:12, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Support - Sorry it took me so long to get back to you on the PR. I still hate MLA, but you're right, there's no WP guideline to suggest it over any other format. :) All my concerns in the PR were addressed, so I can't very well have any others here. Great work. - dharm a bum 23:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC)