Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mothers of the Disappeared/archive3


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ucucha 18:43, 23 October 2011.

Mothers of the Disappeared

 * Nominator(s): Melicans (talk, contributions) 01:29, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello everyone. Here's "Mothers of the Disappeared" for your attention. I am nominating this for featured article because I believe it meets or exceeds all of the current FA criteria. A mostly unknown song by U2, it closed off The Joshua Tree and details the disappearances of students during the Dirty War. The article is currently a GA and has been nominated at FAC twice before; on both occassions it was closed due to a lack of feedback. Images and sources have been cleared in the past, and the article has changed little since the last nomination. Here's hoping that the third time is the charm! Melicans (talk, contributions) 01:29, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:20, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Page numbers needed for newspaper/magazine sources without weblinks
 * Some of these (mostly page numbers for newspaper/magazine sources) I can't fix for a day or two (I need access to my University's library to get to them) so I hope that delay will be okay. Melicans (talk, contributions) 03:56, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I've now been able to address the majority of these. Searches through the online databases available through Carleton University, and some lucky hits on Google, have provided either links or page numbers for the majority that were missing. The remainder were obtained from a U2 fan site that reprints the articles without page numbers, and which I cannot cite directly due to possible copyright infringement concerns on their end. Melicans (talk, contributions) 19:18, 24 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Don't bracket ellipses
 * The brackets have been removed; thanks! Melicans (talk, contributions) 03:59, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Be consistent in how multi-author works are notated
 * I've used the various cite templates throughout the article, so I'm unsure as to how to change the consistency on multi-author notations. Do you have any suggestions on how to go about this (I'm a little rusty)? Melicans (talk, contributions) 03:56, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The cite templates allow for a couple of different notations for multiple authors, including the |last2= and |coauthor= parameters. If you could standardize on one or the other, I think that would fix the issue. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:13, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see what you mean now! Done and done; I switched the instance of first2/last2 to coauthor so as to not just use first1 (hard to have a last when the name is just Bono!). I think that should fix it. Melicans (talk, contributions) 17:22, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Be consistent in whether you provide locations for albums. Also, are catalog numbers available for these?
 * Locations and catalog numbers have been added for all of the sources that use the album liner notes. Melicans (talk, contributions) 03:56, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Foreign-language sources should be identified as such
 * The two foreign-language sources used have both been amended with this. Melicans (talk, contributions) 03:56, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Be consistent in how editions are notated. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:20, 14 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the source review! Melicans (talk, contributions) 03:22, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Media checks out. Excellent rationale on the sound file. I'm not concerned about File:Que digan dónde estan.jpg- each individual photograph may well be copyrighted, but de minimis would apply. However, the image page could do with a cleanup (Template:Information is your friend). J Milburn (talk) 11:18, 14 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Cheers for the media review. I'll get to cleaning up the image page shortly. I've edited the Commons page accordingly and filled out all the details into the template. Thanks for providing that link; I wasn't aware that page existed but it will definitely be a useful thing to check against! Melicans (talk, contributions) 03:22, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Support&mdash;a well-developed and nicely written article on one of my favorite U2 songs; a deep and moving piece. I couldn't see anywhere that the article needed to be improved upon. The only minor issue was the use of a spaced em-dash, but that was inside double quotes so perhaps it's okay ("...they will let you know — but that doesn't..."). Good job. Regards, RJH (talk) 19:23, 15 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for the support; I'm glad that you enjoyed reading the article as much as I did writing it! Melicans (talk, contributions) 03:22, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Oppose for several unreferenced statements of questionable notability. An article like this needs to be extra good because per WP:NSONGS a "mostly unknown song" arguably shouldn't have an article at all. I need to see more coverage in reliable sources. --John (talk) 18:45, 18 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Aside: While I'm not the article nominator, I must say your objections have left me puzzled. Your statement regarding "questionable notability" is odd as the notability requirement usually applies to the article as a whole. You also failed to identify which statements you have an issue with, making the objection vague and less than helpful. Perhaps you could tag them with citation needed templates?


 * My interpretation of the WP:NMUSIC page is that they are meant to be guidelines to help determine whether the article should be kept or deleted. Clearly this article already satisfies WP:GNG, and if the article is notable, then it should survive an AfD. But the issue of notability has nothing to do with whether it satisfies the FA criteria or not; that's for an entirely separate process to determine. Hence, your criteria for an oppose doesn't even seem relevant.


 * Perhaps you could clarify a little further? Regards, RJH (talk) 01:45, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I've made every effort in sourcing this article. It's possible that my stale eyes have missed something however, so if there is anything you have seen amiss that needs to be fixed, I would find it very helpful if you stated what exactly has been missed so that it may be fixed. Judging it to be 'mostly unknown' based solely on my introduction to the piece would seem to fall into the trap of WP:OR ;-). I believe that the numerous independant third-party sources spaced throughout the article satisfy the notability criteria; but of course, if others feel differently, I would be more than happy to discuss it at length at the appropriate venue (note that notability - pun not intended - is not a part of the featured article criteria). Melicans (talk, contributions) 03:18, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The specific language I have a problem with is "U2 have rarely performed "Mothers of the Disappeared" live." Considering how great their output has been, I don't think we can say that unless it is directly sourced. There must be a lot of their songs, even those notable enough for us to accord them standalone articles, which they have played fewer times than this. I would just remove this sentence and list the performances which are referenced. --John (talk) 02:38, 20 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Prose is generally my weakest suit (or is that suite?) in article building, and that's a very valid point. There are certainly many songs they have performed more rarely ("Your Blue Room", "So Cruel", "Shadows and Tall Trees", "Do You Feel Loved", "Crumbs From Your Table", 90% of Zooropa, to name just a few more)! I've altered the text to remove that statement in both the lead and the 'Live performances' section. How does it look now? Melicans (talk, contributions) 02:48, 20 September 2011 (UTC)


 * That looks a lot better now. I want to take one final look before supporting. --John (talk) 05:07, 21 September 2011 (UTC)


 * If you find anything further, please let me know! Melicans (talk, contributions) 03:04, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I took a last pass and mainly trimmed words and what seemed like a non-notable cover right at the end. Covers need third-party notability same as everything else. Apart from that, lovely and thought-provoking article, thanks for your hard work. Support. --John (talk) 07:30, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for all of your valuable feedback, and for your support! Melicans (talk, contributions) 12:15, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Support. --John (talk) 07:30, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Copyscape review - No issues were revealed by Copyscape searches, which also verified the accuracy of the quotations from Rolling Stone and The Washington Post. Graham Colm (talk) 11:08, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Has there been a spotcheck of the sources? Ucucha (talk) 15:12, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Not yet in so far as I know. Out of curiosity, what is the different between Copyscape and spotchecks? I always assumed they were the same thing. Melicans (talk, contributions) 15:15, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Copyscape is an automated tool, which has the disadvantage of catching mostly very very close paraphrasing, missing larger-scale issues like sentence or paragraph structure or synonym paraphrase. Manual spotchecks have the added advantage of being able to verify that the source actually supports the material it's citing. I'll do spotchecks here shortly if no one beats me to them. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:58, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Spotchecks of 6 sources
 * Page(s) for FN 21?
 * "active in causes for children" is a direct quote from the source, and should be noted as such or rephrased
 * I'm not seeing any of the info cited to FN 12 in that source, at least not on that page. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:43, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Page 16; I've added it to the title, although I can move to the page field if you prefer.
 * Oops, don't know how I missed that. I've put in the quotations.
 * That's weird; looking at the Google Books preview that page isn't available anymore. Since the information is also contained in FN 11, which is tacked on to the end of the same sentence, I've removed it. Weird. The only thing I can think of is that it backed up something else which was later removed, and I forgot or missed it somehow. Melicans (talk, contributions) 19:11, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The sources I initially checked are now fine, as are two additional sources checked. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:19, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Support Comments 
 * The sentence in the lead about the a cappella re-recording seems out of place. Perhaps move it to the end of the lead?
 * Done.


 * "Writing, recording and inspiration" – I think the inspiration came before the writing and recording
 * Good eye, thanks!


 * dictatorial can probably be delinked. More specific links follow, anyway.
 * Done.


 * The Clayton boxed quote doesn't add anything not already covered in the prose.
 * Boxed quote removed.


 * " Bassist Adam Clayton stated that the melody..." – The fact is relevant, but who stated it is not.
 * Removed.


 * Audio signal processing is linked twice (processed, processing)
 * Delinked the second instance.


 * "love/hate relationship" – replace the slash with an en dash. The article Love–hate relationship, though not very well developed, actually cites two sources that call for the en dash.
 * Changed the instance in the prose but not in the quote box, as it is a direct quote from the text.


 * "...and that this was influencing his work..." – "influenced" instead?
 * Changed.


 * "who was breaking the miners ... So we were" – I think you need to have four periods after miners, with no space between, because you resume the quote at a new sentence.
 * Done.


 * "Bono sang "el pueblo vencera" at the end of each performance." – missing accent
 * Fixed.


 * "with The Edge performing the song on a charango" – with + noun + -ing
 * Split into two sentences to get rid of the 'with'.


 * "a charango which Chilean President Ricardo Lagos had given to Bono" – in American English, there's a subtle difference between "that" and "which". To be inclusive, I would replace "which" with "that". And I know it's acceptable in British English because you use "that" many times elsewhere in this article.
 * Done.


 * "the Boston Globe" –> The Boston Globe. Also in citation. Same with (The) Dallas Morning News. Check for others.
 * All checked.


 * "called the song "powerful", describing the backing vocals as tender and choirlike." – If he presented the backing vocals as evidence of the song's power, this is fine. Otherwise, I would replace "[comma] describing" with "and described".
 * Done.


 * Including Mueller's rating of 3 out of 5 stars doesn't further our understanding of the song, but including his reasons for the rating does.
 * Removed the rating but kept the quote.


 * What makes atU2.com a reliable source?
 * The owner of atU2.com, Matt McGee, is an author well known to U2 related subjects for the book U2: A Diary, which chronicles the life of the band dating from the 1970s to 2009 and is heavily used on many U2 articles on Wikipedia (particularly Timeline of U2). The website was also the media sponsor for the U2 Academic Conference in 2009, which had numerous influential music editors and journalists as keynote speakers.
 * That may be okay if McGee were the writer of the articles in question or if the articles were something like interview transcripts, but not everything he's connected to is going to be reliable for Wikipedia purposes. (That they sponsored a conference is irrelevant – anybody with money can do that.) I'm uncomfortable with the use of Greer's opinion because it can hardly be argued that she's unbiased and we already have the comments of many fully independent critics from unquestionably reputable publications. And Zeitlinger was "hired" to be a forum moderator. I think the article already conveys quite well the solemnity of the song's subject, but if it's important to discuss what the song means to one fan, let's collect that from a more independent source.  Two Hearted River  ( paddle /  fish ) 16:35, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Understood and removed. Melicans (talk, contributions) 16:51, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The link to the U2 concert in Sarajevo only serves to distract from this article
 * Link removed


 * You'd do well to move the music sample out of the infobox into the "Composition and theme" section and put a caption with it explaining what we are supposed to take away from it. (Basically, you can just copy from points 1.2 and 1.3 in the fair use rationale.)
 * Done, but I'm not sure how well done it may be. I'm hesitant about adding any more from the rationale because that would fall into OR.
 * I rewrote it, but feel free to expand/tweak.  Two Hearted River  ( paddle /  fish ) 16:45, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

A well done article. Take care of these issues and you'll have my support.  Two Hearted River  ( paddle /  fish ) 15:07, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the review! I hope that all of your concerns have been addressed. Melicans (talk, contributions) 16:00, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I just fixed a few MOS things and now we're good to go! Great job.  Two Hearted River  ( paddle /  fish ) 17:04, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the support! Melicans (talk, contributions) 17:37, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.