Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Wiggles


 * 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 16:33, 24 May 2008.

The Wiggles
previous FAC (00:03, 17 April 2008)

Self-nominator --Figureskatingfan (talk) 06:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

This marks the fourth time this article has been nominated for FA. In addition, it has been through three peer reviews, a copyedit, and a GAN. As this article's main editor, I have gone on the record, on its talk page, my feelings about the process. One of its weaknesses has been its subject; few editors know about The Wiggles or seem to be interested enough to give the feedback this article has needed. I have followed every reasonable recommendation that has been made, so this article has been greatly improved, even since its last FAC. Most significantly, I have expanded this article by adding two new sections. It is now more like an article about a music group in its structure and tone, and deserving of promotion. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 06:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Comments
 * What makes the following source a reliable one?
 * http://www.bangshangalang.com/


 * Well, it's not the *most* reliable source, but I think it's adequate for our purposes. It happens to be the website of Murray Cook's old band, before he went to university, met the other guys, and helped form The Wiggles.  Although WP:SPS policy says the following about self-published sources:


 * Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources.


 * I think that keeping the BSL site is acceptable because it falls within the "largely" wiggle-room. (Pun intended, haha.)  It is self-published, but I think its creators are trustworthy enough to keep it in. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 00:43, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I've left this out for others to decide for themselves. For myself, I'm thinking it's on the fence enough that I can deal with it. Would be nice if it could be replaced with a better source, but... Ealdgyth - Talk 20:14, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sources look good. Links checked out fine. *IF* I have time, I'll try to get around to reviewing this more fully. I make no promises, I'm quite stretched for time right now. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:46, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Support with the following quibbles.
 * Lead, the "the world's biggest preschool band" needs a direct citation on it.
 * Done.


 * Lead, there are a lot of sentences that start "They..." consider rewording a few.
 * Ok.


 * Musical style section, first paragraph, shouldn't it be "The Wiggles write new music..."? Wrote implies that they don't write new music any more.
 * Changed; I also changed some of the tenses to present tense in that section.


 * Reception section, last pargraph, shouldn't it be "Scholar Kathleen Warren, the group's former professor at Macquarie Univerisity, has been a consultant..."? Using the past tense implies that she is no longer a consultant.
 * Done; similar problem as above.
 * I'm not a copyeditor, by any means, so don't take this as meaning that the prose is perfect. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:03, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your support. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 21:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Hello again. Maybe this time, eh? :)
 * Comments

Hi, Di. Here's hopin', mate!


 * I'm going to do a rewrite of the lead asap, I spotted a few issues there...


 * Feel free, have at it!


 * "a popular pub rock band that had Top 40 hits in Australia during the 1980s." - is there a ref for this?


 * Fixed & clarified.


 * "seemed reminiscent of the misfortunes of Pete Best, the 'fifth Beatle' who famously departed the Beatles before they became the biggest band in the world" - who said this?


 * Um, the ref, from an article about Welcher, is cited immediately after the quote.


 * "Field, to test out the effect of their music on children, gave a copy of their album to one of his young students" - reword this...start the sentence with "To test out..."

I don't believe in starting sentences with prepositions. ;) How's about this for a compromise: "Field gave a copy of their album to one of his young students to test out the effect of their music on children..."


 * "became teachers,[10] but on their manager's advice, they toured..." - what's this got to do with them being teachers?


 * Well, they were going to school to become teachers, but took a year off to tour as The Wiggles to see if they could make a living out of it. Perhaps it needs some clarification: "Field, Cook, and Page began their teaching careers,[10]..."


 * "music has "enhanced their lives"" - is it necessary to quote here?


 * Removed quote.


 * ""Lights, Camera, Action, Wiggles" aired on Channel 7 in 2003, and "The Wiggles Show" in 2004 and 2005" - I think these should be in italics (check MOS:ITALICS)


 * Thanks for changing it.


 * "was different than his band mates," - "to that of" would work better then "than" IMO


 * Followed suggestion.

(more coming later) dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 11:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks again. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 04:54, 19 May 2008 (UTC)


 * "The Wiggles write new music each year since their inception" - tense..."have written", I think


 * Notice that I rewrote that section to present tense. I made a change a few sentences later ("They wrote songs individually at first, but eventually would write as a group...") to make it more clear.


 * The use of "X reports" in the style section is odd...I'm not sold on using "report", can you try another word?


 * Sure, boss. Reports → states. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 03:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * "In 2003, when the group performed..." - currencies need to be noted in this paragraph. eg. $, $ (see where the link goes).


 * Got it.

Yeah, that's about all I got. Going to work on lead now. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:06, 19 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I have some issues with the lead as you changed it. See article's talk page. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 03:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 08:50, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Leaning towards support I didn't know anything about this group before I read this article and I believe it is an excellent introduction and description. It would appear that the editors have sifted through every possible newspaper source - I'm impressed! I checked every source as I was reading. Almost all of them appear to be reliable newspapers. The one problem I had is listed below. Here are the questions and suggestions I have:


 * Thank you; the key to this kind of thing is setting up a Google search, which has been responsible for most of the additions that I've been able to make to this article.


 * Has anyone checked to see if Kathleen Warren has published anything on The Wiggles in a peer-reviewed, academic venue?


 * I just did a brief Google search, and I was able to find one good source, which I will include the next chance I have. I discovered, however, that Warren has written some things for The Wiggles (mostly related to Dorothy).  She warrants her own article.  I could find nothing peer-reviewed, unfortunately.  I've talked about that extensively in this process.  Blue's Clues has had more academic review, probably because the guys are teachers, not researchers, and everyone else involved with them are performers, not academics.


 * It would be nice if more could be said about the group's musical style. From the article talk page, I understand that the sources are limited, however.


 * Something else that has been documented. I included everything that's out there, I'm certain.  I hope that doesn't impede the article's progress.


 * Is it possible to quote some song lyrics? I am unsure if lyrics fall under copyright protection like the audio clips.


 * Hmm, I think they are under copyright protection. I'm not sure how quoting their lyrics would add to the article.  There is a mention about their "simple lyrics", and this in the "Musical style" section: "The Wiggles music isn't all that far removed from what we did in The Cockroaches, just a different subject matter", Field stated. "The Cockroaches sing about girls and love and stuff like that; The Wiggles sing about hot potatoes and cold spaghetti".[44]  I think to do more would fall in OR territory.


 * As someone who studies literature, I guess I am always keen to include some of the "original text". :) Awadewit (talk) 14:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The videos are discussed so often - is it possible to obtain a fair use video clip?


 * Again, I don't think there are fair use videos.


 * In 2008, the group was part of a "ticketing scandal" - This suggests that the group was involved in the scandal, but as far as I can tell from the source, they were not. Perhaps this sentence should be reworded?


 * Done, changed to: "In 2008, the group found themselves in the midst of a "ticketing scandal";[48]"


 * In Australian English, are collective groups referred to in the singular or the plural? I thought it was a little odd to read "The Wiggles are..." and "Their original members..." instead of "The Wiggles is..." and "Its original members..." - Interestingly, sometimes in the article the group is referred to in the singular and sometimes in the plural. I'm not sure that there is a pattern, though.


 * Something else that has been discussed. This is what was said:
 * According to this, the correct usuage is, "The Wiggles were." Right from the article: Proper nouns that are plural in form take a plural verb in both AmE and BrE; for example, The Beatles are a well-known band; The Giants are the champions.
 * I went through this very extensively, unless it's been vandalized. So it's pretty consistent: "The Wiggles are.." and "The group is..." because it's correct usage.
 * So, you see "Wiggles" as plural, I take it? Ah, I see. Ok. Awadewit (talk) 14:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


 * This source looks like an advertisement - Is there no better source for the statement "The group reworked a few Cockroaches tunes like "Do the Monkey", and changed them into children's songs"?


 * That's because it is an ad. I changed the ref, though, to "See..."  The answer to your question is no, there is not a better source.  The CD ad is an example, since it lists the song.  There's also the music clip.


 * I think we might have to remove that piece of information, then, sadly. Advertisements are not reliable sources. Awadewit (talk) 14:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I understand this objection. However, there is the "Ignore all rules" policy: "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it."  I think we should follow this policy in this case.  This source, which lists the songs in a Cockroaches album, is the only source that portrays that "Do the Monkey" was originally a Cockroach tune.  The Cockroaches is both old and obscure enough that they don't have a website or even a listing on Amazon.  I think it's an important enough point to retain the reference, with the compromise of "See..." --Figureskatingfan (talk) 02:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the point is important, too. However, I do not think it is acceptable to ignore the RS policy. We must present our readers with reliable information - this is not. Awadewit (talk) 13:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, I went ahead and deleted this reference. I was able to download the audio sample of "Do the Monkey" that makes the same point, anyway. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 16:05, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Mulligan, Mark. A brief history of nearly everything BSL (DOC). Retrieved on 6 August 2007. - This footnote needs a web source. The link is to a document, but including the website where it is published is also necessary.


 * This is very odd. For some reason, the reference tag doesn't list the source.  I suspect it's due to the .doc extension, so I hope that my solution is adequate.


 * This link wasn't working for me. I only got the ads.


 * Hmm, I was able to get it, even after I cleared my cookies and internet files.


 * Working for me today - internet weirdness, I guess! Awadewit (talk) 14:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm no fair use expert, but the two audio samples seem to illustrate very similar ideas. I wonder if perhaps we should stick with one?


 * I respectfully disagree. "Get Ready to Wiggle" shows where they got their name, and "Do the Monkey" is an example of an old revamped Cockroaches song.  The perfect solution is to get a sample of the original Cockroaches tune.  I own the song, but I haven't been able to transfer it to OGG format.  I'll work on it again.


 * That would be wonderful. Awadewit (talk) 14:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Woo hoo! Done! --Figureskatingfan (talk) 04:00, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

As someone who studies children's literature professionally, albeit that from the eighteenth century, I would like to commend this editor for his/her work. It is not easy to write about children's media without descending into the cutsey or the pedantic. I think that this article has hit on an excellent tone. Awadewit (talk) 17:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Gosh, what a nice thing to say. The Wiggles are the real deal--actual musicians with real performing and song writing skills.  They respect and don't speak down to their audience, so I tried really hard to follow their example in their article.  Both my kids are disabled, and the guys have really influenced them and our entire family in positive ways, so they at least deserve a FA in WP.  They make a real difference, unlike so much of children's entertainment that's out there.  So thank you.

Comments: I see unencyclopedic tones every now and then. "although their performances were full of energy", maybe "very energetic" is better? "piggybacking": that's quite colloquial. Also isn't there any discussion in the media of the criticism of the band? They must've been subject to an awful lot of parody for being extremely annoying to adults, like Barney is. Being somebody who works music articles a lot, seeing a Reception section in a band article in a rather odd. Generally, the critical reception to the band's records is distributed throughout the article along with discussion of the respective record. Why aren't the band members consistently referred to by their last names; that is required to achieve encyclopedic tone. indopug (talk) 19:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Indopug, thanks for your input. The "unencyclopedic tone", to be honest, has been a struggle in this article, both due to my inexperience as a writer and editor, and due to the subject matter.  I've made the two changes you've suggested.  Criticism of The Wiggles, as has already been discussed, is quite rare.  (See this, last point, where I say that The Wiggles aren't Jamie-Lynn Spears, and that they're boring but cute.)  A previous version of this article had a "trivia section" and examples of parodies of The Wiggles (on Jimmy Kimmel, for example), but it was recommended to delete the section.  It was put on a separate article (Cultural references to The Wiggles) instead.


 * Regarding the Reception section: it's here because The Wiggles aren't just a music band; they're a children's entertainment unit, with TV shows, videos, and live shows. I made a conscious decision to not structure it like other band articles, although after some good advice, I was definately influenced by them.  (I was also influenced by Sesame Street.)  Unlike other bands, The Wiggles aren't a group defined by their CDs, so it's unrealistic to structure their article that way.  Plus, there are simply no sources out there reviewing individual albums.  See the challenge?


 * Finally, your issue about the use of the guys' first names. That was also previously discussed, in the previous FAC.  It happens one time, in the paragraph about their stage personnas, where they're called by their first names.  I think that makes the paragraph clearer, so I think it should remain.--Figureskatingfan (talk) 06:51, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Quick comment; I just realised there's only a brief passing mention of "Wake up Jeff", whilst there's a fair bit of talk of their finger-wiggling technique. IMO "Wake up Jeff" needs a bit more discussion as it's rather iconic of The Wiggles. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 06:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Good point. However, where do we draw the line?  There are lots of iconic stuff: "Fruit salad yummy yummy"; "D-O-R-O-T-H-Y"; "Wags the Dog he likes to tango"--should I go on?  What should be included and what not, and where can be find sources for it?  Anyway, "Wake Up Jeff" is discussed on Jeff Fatt's article. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 07:02, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd say that those other things aren't as notable as the Jeff meme. What do the sources say? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The sources say very little about iconic memes of The Wiggles. If they did, it would've been included.  It already has stuff about their schticks and characters.  And like I said, Jeff's narcolepsy is discussed on his bio page.  To be fair, though, I'll see about adding that info over here.


 * Di, I don't know what we were arguing about. I guess I was asleep, har har.  There's already something about "Wake up Jeff" in the article--in the reception section.  I did add the line about how the practice was developed, though.--Figureskatingfan (talk) 04:07, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I believe that I have addressed every single issue brought up about this article. Can someone please pass it, please?--Figureskatingfan (talk) 07:02, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * That isn't really how FAC works! :) Articles are passed by SandyGeorgia after a set period of time and when there is sufficient support; I don't think this FAC has either yet. You'll just need to wait a bit more! :) dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 10:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I understand that, Di. I was expressing some frustration about the process.--Figureskatingfan (talk) 14:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your clarifications above. I just have two more things:
 * Further
 * I think it would improve the lead if you could take "The Wiggles have been called...four million CDs.[3]" from the first paragraph and make it the last paragraph. As I see it, that bit talks exclusively of the quantitative success of the band and moving it to the end would make the lead read analogous to the the article's body itself (first History then Reception). Further, I always get the feeling that whenever an article has its subject's success very close to the start, it is trying to (pardon my phrasing) shove POV down my throat that this " is ZOMG so awesum". What I mean is just after being introduced to who The Wiggles are, I confronted with "they are the biggest kids-rock band ever" with nothing (so far) helping me put that success into perspective or even telling me just why they are famous at all. Note that this reworking of the lead requires no major rewording, just shifting of text.
 * Didn't mean to shove anything down your throat, mate. ;) So I went ahead and made this change as per your advice/recommendation.


 * Like any obsessive rock music fan should, I take offence to the quote, "seemed reminiscent of the misfortunes of Pete Best, the 'fifth Beatle' who famously departed the Beatles before they became the biggest band in the world". Although it is a quote, and not an encyclopedic statement, it is factually incorrect. If you click on the link, you will see that "Fifth Beatle" is a term that is variously accorded to many individuals close to the Beatles (some more deserving than Best, who didn't just leave either, but was acrimoniously fired). While this is tangential to the issue at hand, the quote obviously conveys misinformation to the reader. Could you remove the quote and rephrase the sentence? Of course, you could just replace "the fifth Beatle" with "..." in the quote, but I think the whole thing would work better without a quotation anyway. indopug (talk) 20:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Man, I'm pushing your buttons all over the place! At least they're not Capt. Feathersword's magic buttons. Anyway, I'm only obsessive about The Wiggles, so I didn't know the above info. Thanks for pointing them out, and I made the changes as requested.--Figureskatingfan (talk) 04:23, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You know what? I was really sleepy when I wrote that. A lot of the meaning and significance is lot without it, so I think its fine. I've reverted it back. indopug (talk) 13:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Support - I reviewed this at Peer Review some time ago and am glad to see how it has improved since. A few suggestions: Great work and perserverance, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 00:21, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Add "other" for clarity in The band gained popularity in the United States in 1998 when Lyrick Studios, the producers of Barney & Friends, began distributing Wiggles videos in the US and advertising them in their [other] videos.
 * Possible word change, use "from" instead of "to" in Moran's background in musical theatre was different to that of his band mates,...
 * Give the year for their honorary doctorates


 * Thanks. The above suggestions have been followed. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 04:29, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Support I find no further problems regarding a possible unencyclopedic tone; the article is very good. indopug (talk) 20:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Wait, this needs rewriting: "The group has decided to play a different kind of children's music.[4] They are not tied to one style or genre of music and are able to experiment in the studio." I think there's some tense issues in there. indopug (talk) 20:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Support This is an article that I've contributed to heavily, but Figureskatingfan has been the driving force behind getting it to the quality that it's at. I've not voiced my opinion on previous FAC's because I didn't feel that the article was quite there. I do now, so I'll make one of my rare FAC appearances.Balloonman (talk) 07:11, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: I formatted some incomplete citations, and I want to make sure the nominator is aware that TV.com is generally not reliable for most purposes, although it seems to be used here only to source characters played, so that seems allright. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 16:18, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Yup, I'm aware. And you're correct--this source is used only for the characters.  I figured using TV.com was better than OR, so I took the risk.  Thanks for the format changes. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 16:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.