Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Spice Girls/archive1

Spice Girls
First, I am not going to type using big words and try to sound like a professor. I am merely going to state my reasons for why this article should be a featured article candidate.

One, this article has gone through many changes. In the beginning, it was small, and only gave a bit of information on the Spice Girls, but with time, it grew, and grew, through the good and bad times, to present day.

Image copyright violations occurred in the past due to a user who was unsure of how to post images under fair usage (whatever the template might be). However, that issue has now be resolved, and every picture displayed in this article contains fair use, and exhibits pieces of the Spice Girls career, from album covers, to their appearances in commercials, to scenes from music videos.

There were a few mistakes that were added to the article originally - one that was extremely incorrect but could not be detected until recently, but has now been cleared up.

Despite easy and hard times, the Spice Girls article is definitely an article that took time to be completed, illustrating that its editors took time to search thoroughly for information and facts - not just post assumptions and terribly incorrect data.

That is why I think the Spice Girls article should be the featured article. DrippingInk 19:12, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Support. Well-written, readable, accurate. 64.231.118.193 19:20, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Above vote appears to be a sockpuppet vote from the nominator. (evidence). slambo 14:37, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Object 1) the lead section is too short and doesnt adequately summarize the entire article. 2) cite your sources. 3) It's an article about a music group, but there are no samples of the group's music. slambo 20:16, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * Never strike out someone else's comments. slambo 18:01, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * Object, sufficient reason stated above. Phoenix2 00:13, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Mild object. What Phoenix2 said. Otherwise, it's a good article. --FuriousFreddy 01:10, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. No references. Deltabeignet 03:14, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. There's no requirement that references be provided in the text, especially in an article like this.  Nor is there a requirement that the summary does more than this one does (how could one summarise this sort of information?).  The demand for samples of the music is peculiar; is slambo asking editors to break copyright laws? Mel Etitis  ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 09:37, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It's a current FA policy that all FAC articles must have sources as a primary prerequisite. Short (thirty second or less) .ogg clips of a handful of the group's most notable songs are fair use. As far as summarization, nixie seems to have described well what is needed below. --FuriousFreddy 17:07, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * No, I'm not asking anyone to break copyrights. 10 second clips as a demonstration of the music style is fair use.  The same goes for quoting a couple sentences of text in an article.  slambo 18:02, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * I'll grant you that ten seconds would probably be more than enough for anyone in this case, but it's surely simply not true that samples are necessary. Following your analogy, are you saying that articles on writers must contain quotations from their works?  This seems excessively rigid, and isn't mentioned anywhere in the FAC guidelines so far as I remember. Mel Etitis  ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 18:59, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Making a handful of .ogg samples of "Do You Wanna Be My Lover" and a few other Spice Girls records isn't at all an arduous task. I was asked to do it when I nominated The Supremes; the idea makes sense. --FuriousFreddy 23:13, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * If I had suggested that it was arduous, this would have been an adequate response. Mel Etitis ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 09:06, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Please do not insult other Wikipedians. I only said that because, based upon responses such as "but it's surely simply not true that samples are necessary", it seems that you think making the samples would be too much trouble (that is, making editing the article, it would seem, in your eyes a more difficult or "arduous" task than previously planned.) If you didn't think it was too much trouble ot add the samples, I humbly apoligize, but that appears to be what you are saying. I like this article; there are just some criteria, both required for all FA nominees (references and citations) and unique to music related articles (song samples). --FuriousFreddy 14:16, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Insult? Still, I accept your apology. Could you point me to the explanation of the criteria that you mention?  I'm new to the FAC business, and though I never intend to nominate an article, I'd be interested to see the details. Mel Etitis  ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 14:49, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It read like an insult, is all. As far as your request, see What is a featured article. The music sample inclusion is a sort of unspoken rule, it seems, when it coems to music-related articles. I'd never thought of doing it myself until I was requested to. It does make sense, and soemtimes it can be fun. If you don't do it, I won't object to the FAC nomination (that is, after the lead is legnthened and the references added), but some other editors probably will. --FuriousFreddy 18:22, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It goes along the lines of comprehensiveness. We don't specifically state that biographies require birth/marriage/death info, but if it's not there, we cite it as an actionable objection.  When the Timpani article came through, one of the objections stated was that there were no sound clips.  When we write about authors, I see no reason not to include a quote quote or two to demonstrate the writier's style.  When we write about painters, sculptors or architects, we need to include images of their works.  Sure, it's not listed as a strict requirement, but an article about someone who produces artworks in any form should have samples of the artworks to show the artist's style. slambo 11:31, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * That undersuts my request to FuriousFreddy above. Wouldn't it be a good idea to explain this in the FAC criteria, rather than letting people nominate articles and only then be faced with objections? Mel Etitis  ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 14:49, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a better explanation of "comprehensive" would be useful on the criteria page. Did this article go through peer review? The objections that have come up so far are items that are often noticed and corrected there before the nomination here. slambo 15:15, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Object, the lead is missing several things, like the time period the band existed, how the band formed, number of albums, merchandising spin-offs like the movie, for a featured article the lead is supposed to summarise the entire article. All featured music artists have samples, they need to be .oog files, and if they are less than 30 seconds long then they are acceptable as fair use.--nixie 13:53, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Ahem, my reasons for this are that the lead section doesn't require the article itself. It is, after all, a summary, and tossing everything into it would be pointless. The rest of the article would only serve as a place to pick up the little nit-picks and what-nots. Secondly, no sample music is required. Just like DrippingInk said, Wikipedia is not an HMV store. Third, the information itself is extremely readable, is presented with images suited, and goes beyond what I even knew about the Spice Girls. The career records and achievements is a perfect addition, and with cites to the various sources, it is now obvious that this information is not made up. I am truly impressed with the editors of this section. All of them. This article is extremely well-done, and I give it ten out of ten stars. 64.231.161.245 21:41, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Above comment appears to be a sockpuppet vote from the nominator (evidence). slambo 14:39, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * (The above comment was made from an IP address that shows exactly seven edits, all on June 19; 64.231.118.193 has made exactly five edits, all on June 18) From the lead section page: "The lead should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it could stand on its own as a concise version of the article." I don't think the lead on this article meets this criteria. Compare the lead on this article with the leads on other recently featured articles such as Igor Stravinsky, The Temptations or The Supremes.  The music samples are an actionable objection; an article about a music group isn't entirely comprehensive without samples of the group's music.  As to the references, What is a featured article states: "Includes references, arranged in a ==References== section and enhanced by the appropriate use of inline citations (see Cite sources)."  All of my objections still stand as there has been no change to the article.  slambo 11:51, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Wow, you people here on Wikipedia truly are complete fools. I'm surprised someone hasn't slapped you straight across the face yet. DrippingInk 19:55, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Please avoid making comments such as this. Continued personal attacks can be considered grounds for blocking. I would much rather see that energy directed to ensuring that the objections listed above get addressed in the article.  You know much more about the subject of this article than I do (I favor jazz from the 1920s and 1930s myself); this article is close to featured quality, and it would be nice to see the objections resolved.  slambo 20:06, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Object reluctantly for the reasons given by slambo - I have had my eye on this article for a while, but it needs a better lead, references and (subject to copyright concerns, particularly as this is a UK band) sound samples. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:24, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Object for the reasons above stated (sound samples, references, lead), and some problems with neutrality. The sentence A cleverly constructed image combined sex appeal with post-feminist self-confidence ("Girl Power", as they labelled it) guaranteed them a large female fanbase, at least., for example, is hardly indisputable, and needs to sourced to whoever believes it.  There's some other stuff that should be copyedited out, like giving the hook for "Wannabe", which isn't particularly useful here and seems out of place. Tuf-Kat 02:17, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * As stated before, and I don't care if you scream back at me, you're all complete idiots. The Spice Girls were obviously going to obtain a female fanbase in the least. This does not need to be sourced because it's damn well obvious. And the hook for "Wannabe" is certainly useful, and nowhere near out of place. To ALoan, your comments are much more respectable, except for the sound samples, which are not required to complete an article.


 * Hopefully most of you Wikipedians will learn something - because most of you aren't that wise at all. DrippingInk 19:33, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)