Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Powderfinger


 * 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 20:06, 28 November 2007.

Powderfinger
I'm nominating this article for featured article because... because I feel after a lot of work from WikiProject Powderfinger and its individual members, it meets the featured article criteria. The article only just reached GA in August this year, but I believe that the article has improved substantially since then. I am happy (and I'm sure other members of the project are, too) to respond to any comments or suggestions you may have about the article. Thanks,  Spebi  09:16, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * As a contributor, I believe it meets the criteria now too. Support. -- linca linca  09:20, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support with some comments/queries/suggestions:
 * "and rankings on Australian music charts" — maybe clarify that Aust. music charts are top 100 (are they top 100?), to give perspective on how much of an achievement this is.
 * Now reads and rankings in top 100 on Australian music charts. ✅.  Spebi  06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "the tracks "These Days" and "My Kind of Scene" were written by the band for the films Two Hands and Mission: Impossible II" — is that respectively (ie. TD -> TH and MKOS -> MI2) or did they write both songs to be featured in both movies?
 * ✅.  Spebi  06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "Powderfinger was formed in 1989 as a high school band by members vocalist and guitarist Ian Haug, bassist John Collins and drummer Steven Bishop, who took their name from the name of a Neil Young song" — was it the same high school they all attended (as implied by the sentence)? If so, which one?
 * I removed the high school bit, even though they did form as a high school, I can't find much web content that actually states which school, so I removed that part. Now reads Powderfinger was formed in 1989 by, so pretty much ✅.  Spebi  06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "Powderfinger's final lineup change came" — I read this (especially the word 'final') as if it was there final lineup change ever, which might be applicable if the band wasn't still active. However, given they are still active and touring, would it be better to add a qualifer to the effect of "to date"? You kind of do this in the next sentence, but it confused me while reading it through the natural flow, so those two sentences may need a tweak for clarity.
 * ✅.  Spebi  06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "of other artists' songs, gradually developing their own material" — reads as if there's a word missing before 'gradually', given the two parts separated by the comma are a contrast.
 * I can't really see what's the problem with that one, so I've left it as it is.  Spebi  06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "The EP quickly became successful and the group was signed to Polydor Records, a major record label in the UK" — reference (or is it the one from the next sentence?).
 * ✅.  Spebi  06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "It charted poorly and failed to launch the band" — that really needs a reference, as it's a judgement statement.
 * I merged it a bit.  Spebi  06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "Four singles were released from the album; "Pick You Up", "D.A.F.", "Living Type" and "Take Me In", which was released as a video-single featuring several other music videos by the group" — all four were released as a video single, or just "Take Me In"? If it's "Take Me In", please add 'the latter' or words to that effect before 'were released'.
 * ✅.  Spebi  06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "A FasterLouder reviewer commented that" — what's FasterLouder?
 * ✅.  Spebi  06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "selling over 280,000 copies[22] and spent almost two years in the albums chart" — confusion of tenses there: either 'selling' and 'spending' or 'sold' and 'spent'.
 * Fixed, now reads Internationalist sold over 280,000 copies, and spent 100 weeks in the ARIA Albums Chart, although this might clash with the previous sentence a bit, it'll do for now. ✅.  Spebi  06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "and reached European audiences for the first time" — what's Europe? *ducks* In all seriousness, just link Europe as it's the first time it's been used in the article.
 * ✅.  Spebi  06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * ""Passenger", a song from the album, was also nominated for three awards in 2000" — specify ARIA, as there are a lot of awards out there.
 * ✅.  Spebi  06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * "Odyssey Number Five was Powderfinger's most successful album to date" — does 'has been Powderfinger's most successful to date' work better?
 * ✅.  Spebi  06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That's a fair chunk of the article reviewed. I'll hopefully get the rest done over the weekend. On the whole it's a very good piece of work, and the article is very comprehensive and thorough nonetheless, however some minor tweaks may just clean it up slightly. Cheers,  Daniel  06:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review, I think it's really what the article needed :)  Spebi  06:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment MOS breach - album names shouldn't be in bold. Also, the "main article" things at each section is unnecessary. It would be useful to enclose the period of reference in parentheses in each sub-section heading like "Formation and early releases (1989-93)". Tommy Stardust (talk) 07:03, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * In regards to the album bolding, I'd like to divert your attention to Nine Inch Nails, which currently uses bold on album titles an their only EP release. I decided to bold the album titles on this article, and only the album titles (because Powderfinger have released 4 EPs, 2 in one timeframe, which in turn would make Early releases look way too bold-y). I think the mains should stay, but perhaps not contain every release in that era, so I've limited it to only album releases (and for the record, ✅). As for the dates in the headers, ✅, as well.  Spebi  07:12, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * On further thought, I have removed the main templates out from under each header, and removed the bolding; I based these two features on the Nine Inch Nails article, which uses its release of the era as the section header, hence having a need for the template. The main template links the article, so linking directly under the template would make the links redundant, and so bolding was put in place. This article doesn't use the same type of headers, and so it shouldn't use bolding or main (as none of the articles are really main articles, as such).  Spebi  07:23, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of prose issues here. For eg: "Bernard Zuel, of The Sydney Morning Herald reviewed" and "The band received much praise and criticism, for the political views in several songs" incorrectly use a comma, the "We would never try and preach" quote is wholly unnecessary as the exact same thing as been explained in th prev line... And what exactly is a "similar" rock group? A thorough copy-edit is required. Tommy Stardust (talk) 09:07, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Initial comment Unless the website that reprints the article has permission to reprint it, you shouldn't link to it. For example, I saw a Rolling Stone article that is reprinted on a fansite. In such instances, remove the direct link and just credit the article as you would if you were referencing it straight out of the magazine. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:53, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅.  Spebi  08:14, 23 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Support Jose João (talk) 09:17, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Not comprehensive. No reception section. --Kaypoh (talk) 04:15, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I can't imagine a section titled "Reception" in the article. If the article was about a single, or an album, then I see the reasoning, but for the main band article, it doesn't seem like something to me that the article should/would/could have. The article has a philanthropy section, covering the band's philanthropic acts, and a musical style section, displaying comments from reviewers of their works relating to the band's style of music.  Spebi  04:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * There is a reception section, it just has a different title. Suggest disregarding this comment, Raul.  Dihydrogen   Monoxide   ♫  05:27, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support as contributor. Dihydrogen   Monoxide   ♫  05:27, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support as contributor. Slabba (talk) 06:39, 24 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Comments ....these days..., no seriously I have a few comments: cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * turned out nothing like I had planned....control well it's slipping right through my hands... oh wait, you have comments...my bad :P Dihydrogen Monoxide  ♫ 07:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Across their 15-year career, Powderfinger has been active in practicing philanthropic acts. - ewww, sounds clunky and unnatural. How about "Across their 15-year career, Powderfinger has been actively involved in philanthropic causes" or just "philanthropy" or something similar.
 * Appears to be ✅ Dihydrogen Monoxide  ♫ 07:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Need to explain why Parables is considered worst album and expand upon why Fanning described them as "dark days"
 * I don't think there is much on that - they really don't like talking about it. Occasionally Bernie says in an interview that he hates the album etc. etc., but that's about all that's noteworthy.
 * OK then - even that would be really helpful - e.g. "Fanning and other band members have declined to speculate" or "reasons no known" or something rather than just how it is. Sorry to be pedantic but this article is verry close but I feel really needs some enrichment somehow if possible.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:50, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I dont' think the album did this after release did it? It was written like that. Needs to be expanded and assessment of album in different sentence.
 * Appears to be ✅ Dihydrogen Monoxide  ♫ 07:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Some of the info seems a bit spartan - can there be any more fleshing out of musical style? And look at ways of reducing a few commas but getting there...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.