Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/In the Aeroplane Over the Sea/archive4

In the Aeroplane Over the Sea

 * Nominator(s): darling (talk) 22:06, 27 September 2023 (UTC), Famous Hobo (talk) 05:17, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

this article is about In the Aeroplane Over the Sea, one of the best and most polarising indie rock albums ever released. the album is branded by surreal and strange lyrics, along with unconventional instruments and performances, making it both a staple in indie rock and generally a staple in music.

this article has been brought into FAC three times previously but all were thrown out due to the inactivity of its nominator—it currently stands in GA-class. I think this album is worth being featured and I'll try and work to get it there if need be—the previous nomination gave the impression that it was worth promoting but the inactivity of the nominator had gotten it closed. —darling (talk) 22:06, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

First-time nomination

 * Hi, and welcome back to FAC. You probably recall that as you have not yet had an article promoted at FAC this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check and a review for over-close paraphrasing to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:46, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

So as the editor who did most of the work on this article, I would have appreciated a head’s up about the nomination. However, I’ve got time on my hands so I’ll be able to also answer any questions. Been meaning to get back to this article anyway. One more thing to note is that an Elephant 6 that actually got released a couple of years ago finally got a non VHS release. I’m not sure how much info it will include about Aeroplane (if any at all, it seems to mostly be about the Elephant 6 collective itself) but I’ll still watch it and see if there’s any new info. Famous Hobo (talk) 23:15, 27 September 2023 (UTC)


 * my bad! I meant to notify you but it seems the reply must not have gone through. —darling (talk) 23:24, 27 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi, as one of the FAC rules is "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article before nominating it" I would normally close this now as a procedural fail. Unless you were inclined to become a co-nominator and help shepherd it through the process? Your call. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:57, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
 * , I’m good with looking after this nomination. Like I said, I’ve been meaning to get to this article, so this ends up working out. Famous Hobo (talk) 23:30, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Excellent. If you could stick your four tildes in the nominators' space above, then we're in business. Gog the Mild (talk) 00:27, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Done Famous Hobo (talk) 05:17, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

DME
A most intriguing indie record. Remind me to take a look at this on Tuesday, I'll give it a check-up.  danny music editor  oops 00:12, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but I won't be able to do this unless the review is at risk of stalling out. I forgot about this when I initially had time, and I have been and currently am too busy to review this at this time. From a simple glance over, I think the subsection on the album's influence is too short and if possible should be merged - my first thought is into the previous subsection - but I would like a second opinion from another contributor on if that's appropriate before it's implemented. It looks very good at a first read, by the way; I did get to that a few days ago.  danny music editor  oops 23:53, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

Comments by AstonishingTunesAdmirer
Hey! Here are some comments I have after reading the article:
 * "on wax" said Richardson" – shouldn't there be a comma before "said"?
 * Fixed


 * "Bilheimer scanned every image onto a dirty piece of paper" – this part sounds extremely confusing to me. I've never heard the phrase "scanned onto" (and googling it I only see "scanned onto computer" and similar), so to me it sounds like he scanned and then copied the images to a piece of paper. The book clarified it: "Chris solved the problem by scanning the back of the postcard and using the [...] paper as the background against which all other images were screened". Also if I read it correctly, it's not a random piece of paper, it's the backside of the original postcard. So, maybe something like "To give the disparate drawings a cohesive look, Bilheimer scanned the back of the postcard and overlaid the images over it"? (sidenote: is it page 80? Google Books has the 2005 edition with the same ISBN as the book cited and it's on page 81 there).
 * I'll admit, I wrote that section years ago and it's mostly stayed untouched ever since. But after looking back at the book, you're absolutely right about the wording. Changed it. Also changed the page number. I'm using the copy on Internet Archive, and it is in fact on page 81 (for reference I went through every other instance of page numbers from that book used in this article and only found one other inaccuracy, which coincidentally was for the same page).


 * "released in the United States on February 10, 1998, by Merge Records, and in the United Kingdom in May 1998 by The Blue Rose Record Company" – is there a reason why there is a comma before the first "by", but not the second one?
 * Pretty sure you're supposed to include a comma after the year if the month day year format is used in the middle of a sentence.
 * Ah, I see, was just wondering that myself.  AstonishingTunesAdmirer 連絡 03:27, 6 October 2023 (UTC)


 * "Ankeny did note however the lyrics were too abstract to derive meaning from" – shouldn't "however" be enclosed in commas?
 * Fixed


 * "The 33⅓ book" – I believe it would be better to say "the 33⅓ series book", as an average reader might not be familiar with the series.
 * I'll be honest, 33⅓ series book sounds clunky, especially since the word series is repeated at the end of the sentence. And while an average reader probably won't know about the 33⅓ series, isn't that what the wikilink is for?
 * Fair enough.  AstonishingTunesAdmirer 連絡 03:27, 6 October 2023 (UTC)


 * It doesn't look like "An Animated Look at Neutral Milk Hotel's In the Aeroplane Over the Sea" ref is used anywhere.
 * Removed, it was a holdover from the Neutral Milk Hotel main article


 * "Why Is 'On Avery Island' The 'Other' Neutral Milk Hotel Album?" ref – same as above.
 * Same as above

That should be it (for now, at least). That's a nice article about a staple of pitchfork-core.  AstonishingTunesAdmirer 連絡 06:03, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Addressed the issues you brought up. Famous Hobo (talk) 01:56, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I went through the article again and I don't see any other issues. It is well-written, the prose is clear. The article is comprehensive, I definitely learned more after reading it. I didn't see anything unsourced and in a few spots I checked the sources supported the text written. The article is properly structured, well-illustrated, and while there's some editing going on, it doesn't change the article significantly. I support this nomination. Good luck!  AstonishingTunesAdmirer 連絡 05:37, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:06, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

UC
A lovely piece of work in so many ways: the writing is really quite impressive in many places. My usual list of nit-picks: there's quite a few, I'm afraid, but I think they should all be pretty quick, easy fixes. UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:53, 18 October 2023 (UTC)


 * : I know what's meant here, but laudatory just means "expressing praise", so you can't really be positive without being laudatory. Suggest or similar.
 * fixed
 * : did not want reads a bit oddly to me in this sentence: I think it's the implied continuous tense of did not want, when we're really working in the past simple. Suggest "he refused to tour again", "withdrew from touring" or similar.
 * fixed
 * : significantly is a tricky one (a certain frequent flier here at FAC would ask "signifying what?"): do we mean "greatly"?
 * fixed
 * : the album has been described, since the last noun was its critical standing.
 * fixed
 * : dangling participle phrase: it was the band, not Mangum, that was initially called Milk. Would italicise or double-quote Milk as MOS:WORDSASWORDS.
 * fixed
 * : a collective of whom? I'm inferring, though it's not stated, that Schneider, Doss and Hart made their own music independently.


 * I'm confused here; it's stated that they're a musical collective, so I don't see what the issue with this is.
 * I found it unclear as to exactly who was in this collective, other than Mangum. He's currently the only person we've identified as making any music up to this point.UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:42, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * would this clarify the connection between the collective then? I'm still a tiny bit confused. —darling (talk) 21:41, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * That's a bit clearer, but we've still got a bit of a difficult join between the two sentences: Some options:
 * Perhaps we could add a clause/sentence in the middle, ending up with something to the effect of ?
 * Otherwise, if they're just a loose collective but not actually working together, we could have:, or ?
 * Thinking harder on this, I think the ambiguity is with the word their: it can mean either "belonging to all of them jointly" (e.g. "Mr. and Mrs. Jones are painting their house") or "individually belonging to each of them" (e.g. "Mr. and Mrs. Jones have got paint on their shirts"). As there's a material difference in this context, it would be useful to find a rephrasing that gets around that ambiguity. UndercoverClassicist T·C 09:38, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thinking harder on this, I think the ambiguity is with the word their: it can mean either "belonging to all of them jointly" (e.g. "Mr. and Mrs. Jones are painting their house") or "individually belonging to each of them" (e.g. "Mr. and Mrs. Jones have got paint on their shirts"). As there's a material difference in this context, it would be useful to find a rephrasing that gets around that ambiguity. UndercoverClassicist T·C 09:38, 25 October 2023 (UTC)


 * changed to let me know if there's any other issues with this. —darling (talk) 00:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * That is a huge improvement: clear, concise, informative and skilfully written. Great job. UndercoverClassicist T·C 17:21, 2 November 2023 (UTC)


 * : another candidate for italics or quotes per MOS:WORDSASWORDS (we're talking about the name specifically, not the thing known by it).
 * fixed
 * : the second line of our article on "Beatlesque" is "The term is loosely defined and has been applied inconsistently". Can we be more specific about exactly what we (and Schneider) mean by it here?
 * source used doesn't particularly identify what it means, just says "high-art Beatlesque production". I'm not fully sure what to do here.
 * If the source itself is the problem, we can do something like "what Jones describes as ..." to make clear where the ambiguity has come in. UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 09:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * fixed. —darling (talk) 17:00, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * : where are these Elephant 6 people coming from? A paragraph ago, there were perhaps four of them. Separately, I think it's worth clarifying that Athens wasn't just where Mangum's mates lived - some sort of comment about its role as a hub for alternative rock since the 1970s would be useful.
 * removed the bit about Elephant 6 musicians as the source mentions it briefly and doesn't mention it as a large group but rather as a hub for them; changed to
 * : do we know why Denver? Athens seems like it would have been a perfectly good place to record it.
 * source notes that Schneider's studio (Pet Sounds) was in Denver. added in text.
 * : might be worth clarifying who/what the Music Tapes were.
 * fixed
 * : grammatically, they did not sound, but I think we need to be a bit clearer: they were Mangum's music, so sounded like it by definition, but presumably they didn't have what Schneider felt to be Mangum's distinctive sound.
 * fixed:
 * : it sounds as though Spillane rewrote the arrangements, which would be tricky if he couldn't read them (I suspect we more mean that he couldn't read treble clef confidently or quickly enough to play from it).
 * addressed in another comment by Harrias
 * : I'm not sure the last bit is right: he didn't record On Avery Island in the same house, so couldn't have used the same basement.
 * Spillane didn't record On Avery Island at all since he wasn't featured on it and wasn't in the band at all; my assumption is that he practiced On Avery Island in his basement and then later both practiced and wrote arrangements in the same basement.
 * : would cut seamlessly as WP:PUFFERY and perhaps unverifiable.
 * fixed
 * : what was the comparison? Was it the 50s/I-vi-IV-V progression, or was there some other sort of similarity?
 * my assumption would be the former, however the source doesn't specify.
 * Not ideal, but might be the best we can do. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)


 * : as this is cited to the album notes, I think it would be better framed as the band's own take on/sales pitch for their work, and attributed in text: knowing that source will affect most readers' handling of the information.
 * this isn't cited to the album's notes, it's cited to an All Music Guide editorial staff review by Jason Ankeny of the album.
 * Apologies: I think the point stands, though: from a WP:VERIFIABILITY point of view, if a judgement is inherently unverifiable, it should be attributed (we can't prove that the links between tracks are seamless, but we can prove that someone has described them as such. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * also took the liberty of fixing consistency issues; Ankeny was introduced more than once within the article.
 * : I would put all of these critical assessments here (though not e.g. Cooper's in the following section) into the past tense, since we're talking about historical assessments rather than trying to establish some kind of timeless truth about the songs, but in any case consistency is called for.
 * fixed
 * What's the logic behind the linking in ?
 * source provided links the lyrics to incest, cannibalism, Southern religious mania and the "gypsy Tarot."
 * Sure, but why not link domestic violence, for instance? <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * oh, my bad; misunderstood your original comment. fixed. Darling (talk) 03:45, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I would render as P. J. Sauerteig for consistency with M. Christian McDermott later.
 * fixed
 * : can we rework this to avoid the awkward repetition of Mark Richardson wrote ... said Richardson?
 * fixed, I hope
 * Would wikilink Anne Frank in the quotebox caption as well, as that comes higher up the page for me than the body text mention.
 * fixed
 * : this is, I hope, a metaphor?
 * "The “Boy”. it turns out, is a ghastly symbol for two who have tried unsuccessfully to merge into one autonomous and coherent entity. The separate identities, or heads, do share a body, but their mangled form floating in formaldehyde is far from a Platonic vision. Here we realize that, in talking about love, Mangum’s scope extends beyond mere romantic love; he is concerned with all yearning and affection that leads us into dangerous pools of interdependence."I don't believe so.
 * Sounds pleasant. In this case, I'd be more explicit about exactly what is being discussed here. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * done:
 * : one of the key rules of quotation is that we should always be able to tell who said it: I assume this is his own recollection, and if so that should be made clear.
 * fixed
 * : I'd ... out though, as it breaks the grammatical flow of the (otherwise expertly constructed) sentence.
 * fixed
 * : can we be slightly more specific as to when old-fashioned is?
 * information on the art is little due to the anonymity of the artist; my presumption is that it's from the time period in which it was drawn (1907-08). I'm not fully confident in changing it to but I think we could work on it.
 * might be better as marching-band members (to clarify that they're not members of a pop group who happen to be marching).
 * I feel as if the added description of the bandmaster is enough to clarify; as far as I'm aware, pop bands don't have bandmasters.
 * Sgt Pepper's aside, you're probably right, but it's not ideal to rely on our readers to know that. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * could also just wikilink to marching band? feels odd to me; I've never seen it described like that. Darling (talk) 04:15, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * There's a MOS:NOFORCELINK argument against that, but then it might be the best possible solution, given that there's arguments against the other ones too. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 06:50, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * : this needs a bit of explaining for me.
 * from the provided source: "Chris: “I wanted to have a little bit of a ‘circus coming to town’ feel without an obviously circusy-looking image. And so I laid out this whole thing and printed it out and crinkled it up and then scanned it back in and laid it on top of old paper. I work really hard to make things look like they weren’t made on a computer. Even though I’m not using traditional graphic methods—it’s the same reason bands like recording with tube amps and recording to tape instead of to hard drive—it has that tactile warmth to it. That’s what I try to do with graphic design. Especially by designing something, printing it out, fucking it up and then scanning it back in.”"
 * Could some of that be worked in? <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)


 * : can we remind or tell the reader how well On Avery Island sold?
 * done
 * : as in lead.
 * fixed
 * : suggest putting a comma after psychedelic to be clear that it's not infused with psychedelic folk.
 * fixed
 * : could we have some examples here? I'm still a little unclear as to who these people are.
 * specified the Olivia Tremor Control and the Apples in Stereo as mentioned in the source.
 * : we need a better word than unique: it's not necessarily a synonym for good, and every song is unique in some way.
 * source uses "oddball," which I think is probably a better replacement. fixed
 * : I'm not sure we've really discussed this at all further up, but we really should.
 * noting for later there is a brief mention along with two quotes, but it could be discussed further if that isn't enough.
 * Where do you mean? I see a reference to the songs mentioning religious fanaticism, and a critic comparing them (very loosely) with a religious vision, but I'm not sure either of these are the same. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * : reads like a MOS:IDIOM to me: what exactly does this mean?
 * my assumption from reading the provided source is that it means that the album was received well on release but shrugged aside afterwards.
 * That sounds reasonable to me; can it be reworked? <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * changed to should be fine?
 * Fine, but consider picking only one of later and shortly after its release. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 07:04, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * removed later. Darling (talk) 12:22, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * : more grammatical as [he] held about...
 * fixed
 * : could do with some love for prose: better as However, he could not..., or perhaps as something more encyclopaedia as "he did not tell the band (until)..."
 * fixed (see below)
 * : we're writing in Wikivoice here, as if this is a matter of objective fact, but seem to have slipped into Mangum's own thoughts and perhaps his own account of this period.
 * fixed:
 * I'm still not wild about "could not bring himself" as encyclopaedic WP:TONE: we don't have the same interest in psychoanalysing our subjects as (say) an (auto-)biography or a music magazine article (and they don't have WP:VERIFIABILITY to worry about). <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * changed to.
 * : can we be more specific on when any of this happened?
 * done:
 * Could we look at out of the spotlight per MOS:IDIOM? <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * would or  work?
 * : some of whom?
 * source doesn't specify. could add or something of that nature?
 * Yes: there's a risk of WP:WEASELWORDS otherwise. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * done.
 * : what does this mean? The usual interpretation would be "made him highly extroverted", which doesn't seem likely here.
 * confused here: see larger than life.
 * I think there's a bit of Engvar confusion going on here: in BrE, the phrase much more means "charismatic" than "famous". Would suggest reworking, if only for the benefit of those who don't have English as a first language. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree, but I'm also having a bit of trouble trying to find another way to say this at the moment. Darling (talk) 21:18, 11 November 2023 (UTC)


 * : I think "entire" is WP:PUFFERY, and would suggest that "for personal closure" is quite uncritically repeating Griffis' conceit/sales pitch: he was also doing it for a paycheck and because he thought others would be interested in reading it. After all, if it was purely a personal project, he could have done it without writing about it.
 * removed the entire; I do, however, disagree on your sentiment that he was purely interested in a paycheck. I read through the original piece (here, archived, if you're interested) and it genuinely goes into some deep and personal experiences that I don't think someone simply going for a paycheck would write about.
 * : this seems to contradict what we said earlier about how . We could either retitle the "Critical reception" section as "Initial critical reception", or move some of this material up, since a section claiming to be about all of its critical reception needs to include the post-2000 reception as well.
 * fixed previously but not noted
 * : about a decade has passed over the last paragraph or so, and that wasn't really clear until I started looking at the dates on the citations. Can we be slightly clearer about the timeframes here?
 * fixed previously but not noted
 * : suggest an "as of" per WP:ENDURE.
 * went for ; source does not provide a year. could remove?
 * Personally, I think the value of the statistic outweighs the (small) uncertainty about its date. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * : feels a bit weird to lead with a website not exactly known as an arbiter of musical taste.
 * fixed previously but not noted
 * : cut all the way as WP:PUFFERY.
 * fixed
 * : cut only as above.
 * fixed
 * : we need a date for these lists.
 * specified and reorganised;
 * I think previous is better than last when the point of reference is moving (and isn't the present-day one), but may be a matter of taste. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * : out of interest, what makes this the best target for that redirect, rather than the disambig page?
 * result of an RfD: Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 25.
 * : what does adapted mean here? I worry that there's a risk of WP:OR, as the liner notes are the only citation here.
 * It just means I sourced the info from the album's liner notes. I can change it to just say Credits sourced from the liner notes to clear up confusion.
 * I'd support that. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)


 * "chapter" in the footnotes should be lower case.
 * Done


 * Huge credit for the detailed licensing information on File:ItAotS postcard origins.jpg.
 * I definitely can't take credit for that, that's Blz 2049's doing :)


 * I don't have enough time to address everything right now, but I've addressed some of your issues. —darling (talk) 17:13, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi darling, Famous Hobo, when do you envisage being able to get back to this? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:07, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm hoping to as soon as possible—finishing up on some work and then I should be able to get back to it. my apologies. —darling (talk) 18:40, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * noting for reference: I'm still active and I'm no longer as busy as I was before. should have a bit of time this week to get to some of the other comments. —darling (talk) 23:25, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for these replies: a small note - please don't strike other people's comments: in this case, it makes it very difficult to tell what I've seen, checked and struck off, and also gives a potentially false impression that I've withdrawn whatever the initial concern or suggestion was. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 17:22, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * my bad—did not see this until just now. —darling (talk) 18:53, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * removed strikes from the list; feel free to add any back. —darling (talk) 18:58, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * all of your comments should be addressed now, but some of them are waiting on your reply. Darling (talk) 21:21, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * ? Gog the Mild (talk) 18:31, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the ping, Gog - Darling, very nice work. Mostly struck; a few replies. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 18:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * , just to make sure that you have seen UC's response; the clock is ticking on this one. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:41, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Support: a few things still open, but these are small matters and the article is very clearly more-or-less in the right place. <b style="color:#7F007F">UndercoverClassicist</b> T·C 07:05, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Comments by FrB.TG
Recusing to review. Down to the end of Recording section. So far only minor nitpicks. Be back for more later. FrB.TG (talk) 13:38, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * "The lyrics are surrealistic and opaque, with themes ranging from nostalgia to love." Can we get rid of the fused participle. Something like "... and themes range from nostalgia to love".
 * changed to your suggestion; however, I do feel like (either or )  may fit better, but I'd like input on that first.
 * Yeah, I agree with using "explore" or "feature". Using "range from ... to ..." is like setting a vague span without knowing what lies in between, much like an undefined variable. It's not as straightforward as a numerical range, leaving room for uncertainty. "Feature" or "explore" provides a clearer lens into what to expect, avoiding the ambiguity of an open-ended spectrum. FrB.TG (talk) 19:45, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
 * "In the Aeroplane Over the Sea was recorded at Pet Sounds Studio from July to September 1997" - WP:NBSP needed between Sep and 1997. Check throughout.
 * added non-breaking spaces; if I missed somewhere, let me know
 * "After graduating from high school, Mangum released the single "Everything Is" on Cher Doll Records under the alias Neutral Milk Hotel." Why the italics? If I'm not wrong aliases are usually not italicized.
 * this was the result of a comment above from UndercoverClassicist per MOS:WAW. the change does also confuse me a little bit, so if there's any issues with it I'm welcome to discuss.
 * "By the spring of 1997" - see MOS:SEASON
 * changed to.


 * addressed your current comments. Darling (talk) 21:32, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

That's it. Just some minor MoS and prose points. I made some copyedits in these edits. Please check them to see if I messed something up or accidentally changed the meaning of something. FrB.TG (talk) 19:45, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
 * "The track describes conjoined twins, although Sauerteig believes the conjoined twins" - perhaps replace the second "conjoined twins" with they to avoid repetition.
 * done
 * the Pazz & Jop, Robert Christgau dismissed the album as "a funereal jape that gets my goat." - the full stop shuold come after the quotation mark at the end (see MOS:LQ).
 * fixed
 * "In a 2016 article, journalist Luke Winkie said the initial reception was "the standard response to a confusing second album from a band without a preexisting pedigree: distant praise, hedged bets, avoiding the heart at all cost."[64]" Same as above. Check for other instances in the article.
 * fixed; no other ones that I can find.


 * done. found no issues with your copyediting. Darling (talk) 01:44, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you. My review of the prose and MoS is finished. Now let's cover sourcing.

Quite some unused sources. Examples: Oppose on 1b and 1c and recommend withdrawal at this point. The FAC has been open for more than a month now, and I think using these sources (and possibly others I have missed) would change the article significantly. That should take place outside the FAC venue. FrB.TG (talk) 06:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
 * https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-34015-9_6 - this chapter delves into how In the Aeroplane over the Sea intertwines affective music with utopian longings, using Anne Frank's complex portrayal and Jeff Mangum's Occupy Wall Street performance to illustrate the challenges in realizing these wishful images. Quite some useful material there I think.
 * https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Routledge_Companion_to_Popular_Music.html?id=-apxDwAAQBAJ - there's a lot to cover here.
 * https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17450101.2021.194692 - this one makes only a passing note on how the album's title refers to mobility but this could still be useful IMO.

Harrias – Support
That's it from me. Nice work. Harrias (he/him) • talk 15:04, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * As with the lead, anything in the infobox should also appear in the body of the article; I can't find a mention of the October 13, 1998 single release date of "Holland, 1945" in the body.
 * fixed:
 * Wikilink Demo (music) on first mention.
 * done:
 * "..tube mic pre-amp.." Both mic and pre-amp appear to be informal terms, and although we link to preamplifier, I don't know what a "tube mic" is; that isn't mentioned at that page.
 * since I'm not entirely sure, I'll take a look at this when I have the book on-hand; not at my home right now.
 * source used the same language. changed pre-amp to just and wikilinked tube to Valve amplifier.
 * "maxed out" More informal language.
 * changed to.
 * "The trumpets were written in treble clef, but as Spillane could only read bass clef, he had to rewrite these arrangements before he could learn them."}} If Spillane couldn't read treble clef, how could he rewrite them?
 * another thing I'll have to check in the book.
 * source provides no information on this. "Scott can read bass clef, but trumpet is written in treble, so he had to take the parts and rewrite them in the bass clef so he could learn them."
 * Had a chat to my wife, who can actually read music, and she is happy the original makes sense. The assumption being that Spillane can probably understand treble clef well enough to translate it into bass clef, but not to be able to play from it in real time. I'm happy to leave the original wording. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 20:30, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * In the prose and a table, you style "AllMusic" without italics, but italicise it in the references: be consistent.
 * fixed
 * "P.J. Sauerteig" The MOS prefers spaced initials: P. J.
 * fixed
 * "The lyrics will sometimes.." I don't think "will" is needed here.
 * fixed
 * "The front cover contains a drawing of two bathers out at sea.." Technically there are four, as there are another two in the background.
 * fixed; corrected in alt text as well.
 * "Slate alleges that some were angry or accused Mangum of being selfish.." Some what? I assume it means fans, clarify that.
 * fixed
 * "..has sold over 393,000 copies.." I'd note that this was in 2013. I appreciate it will obviously still be true, but it also contextualises it.
 * fixed:.


 * addressed all of your comments; treble clef one left uncompleted since I'd like your input on it. Darling (talk) 20:16, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Replied above. Will give the article another once over before finalising. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 20:30, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * All looks good me, happy to support. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 19:53, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Heartfox
Oppose per WP:FACR 1c – There are a dozen critical reviews available on Newspapers.com through WP:TWL that are not cited in the article. Yes, critical reception sections can be based on music-oriented publications, but lack of including reviews from prominent newspapers like San Francisco Chronicle, The Sunday Telegraph, etc. limits the ability of the critical reception section to be "a through and representative survey of the relevant literature". Newspaper reviews are an important aspect of critical reception, showing how non-specialized outlets interpreted the work. And Newspapers.com is just one database—there is likely more on ProQuest or Google News Archive, etc. This impacts not just the critical reception section but others. It does not seem like there has been any research conducted in databases available to editors WP:TWL. Heartfox (talk) 23:25, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Agree. Withdraw the nom, revise and resubmit in due course. This isn't just about a FAC criterion: NPOV is both policy and pillar.  ——Serial  11:39, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

This is a long way from a consensus to promote, and so I am going to archive it. I recommend that the nominator study the comments of the reviewers above, especially those not currently supporting, before bringing it back to FAC. The usual two-week hiatus will apply. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:57, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 12:57, 13 November 2023 (UTC)