Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Thriller (album)/archive2


 * 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 not promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 20:43, 3 July 2008.

Thriller (album)

 * ''Nominator(s): Realist2

previous FAC (22:37, 9 April 2008)

Hello, I would like to nominate Thriller for FA. It's last FA resulted in the article being "not promoted" as I withdrew the nomination on April 09 2008. I withdrew because of a certain episode of racial taunting I received and my erratic behaviour in response to it. Another issue was the content that is now Thriller 25. At the time this article was actually a part of the Thriller article. A number of reviewers opposed FA because of the lengthy detail dedicated to the reissue. The reissue was eventually merged out and passed GA in its own right within days.

Since the withdraw, Thriller has been peer reviewed 3 times. The Reviewers were; Efe, Indopug (twice), Matthewedwards, Ruhrfisch, Kakofonous, Ealdgyth and Giggy. The article has also been copy edited by a number of editor that includes; Efe, Kodster, Kakofonous and Andreasegde.

As the article stands, the lead presents a neat overview of the article I have presented. I went for an unsourced lead with the references in their relevant section of the article. This has always been my favoured style. The article then documents the recording of the album, the "Themes and genres" expressed by Jackson in the record, the albums release & the reception both critical and commercial. The article then presents an overview of a number of events that tipped the record into becoming the worlds best selling album, a critical component that helps answers the complex question "how did Thriller outsell any other record?"

The reader is then presented with a section dedicated to the influence and legacy of the record. The affect it had on the recording industry, how it broke down racial barriers, rebuilt MTV and finally where it stands today, 25 years later. The article has 70 individual references and is sourced approximately 100 times. Sources include biographies, interviews, online news articles & websites. Could I remind all reviewers that English is not my first language. Could reviewers make any concerns crystal clear in full sentances to avoid any confusion on my part. Cheers. — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 01:17, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Oppose for now, the article still requires some attention: 2008 (UTC) I've made some suggestions,, I hope they help. Graham Colm Talk 20:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * ' 'Jackson himself rarely commented on the work's recording'' - redundancy.
 * DONE — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 18:35, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 *  wrote and played the drums - he wrote the drum part?
 * Clarified — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 18:35, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 *  Temperton wrote the spoken portion in a taxi, on the way to the recording studio. Jones and Temperton said that some recordings were left off the final cut because they did not have the edginess of other album tracks - some of the spoken recordings?
 * I'm confused by what your asking me to do here, sorry, could you clarify your concern. —  Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 18:35, 29 June 2008
 *  Despite the light pop flavour of these two records, Thriller, more so than Off the Wall, displayed foreshadowings of the contradictory thematic elements that would come to characterize his later work.  - the pronoun should be changed to Jackson's
 * DONE —  Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 18:44, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 *  and was Jackson's first successful rockcross over piece.  - a mistake here.
 * DONE —  Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 18:44, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 *  Thriller was followed by the release of a large number of singles - singles from the album or singles in general? If the former, the number was not large.
 * Clarified. — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 18:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 *  The pop duet led some to believe that the album would be a disappointment. Others suggested that Jackson was attempting to attract a white audience. - What pop duet?
 * Clarified. --— Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 18:50, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * T he ballad "For All Time" supposedly dates from 1982, but leaks often credit it as being from Dangerous sessions. Both the leaked'' vocals and new performances were included on this track. Two singles were released from the reissue: "The Girl Is Mine 2008" and "Wanna Be Startin' Somethin' 2008". - What leaks? And this needs a citation.
 * Clarified, removed unsourcable "leaked" issue. — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 18:54, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * There is U.S. throughout, (often U.S.. with a double period), but UK is used.
 * I followed what the actual articles do. U.S. & UK. Dots are not used for UK apparently whereas for America they are. Is this ok or should I change something? — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 19:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, Change U.S. to simply US, don't worry about the articles' usage; we have our own rules. Graham Colm Talk 19:26, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * DONE, think I got the lot of them. :-) — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 19:39, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * ''" At some point, Thriller stopped selling like a leisure item – like a magazine, a toy, tickets to a hit movie – and started selling like a household staple." - The Emdashes need fixing. Graham Colm Talk 14:20, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * DONE — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 19:10, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ive resolved your concerns as much as I can, I just need a little clarification on some of your points. Thankyou for your points. — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 19:10, 29 June
 * Thanx. — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 20:40, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Gary King ( talk ) 21:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * "of U.S.$750,000. " – "of US$750,000. "
 * "Instead, he would dictate into a sound recorder, when recording he would sing from memory." – needs a break between the first and second phrases, like a conjunction or a semicolon
 * DONE - Resolved your two points, cheers. :-) — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 21:23, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links check out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:05, 30 June 2008 (UTC) Comments - Issue with numbers: numbers less than 11 are written out; from 11 to 100 can be words or figures (consistent within the article), and above 100 are usually figures. Examples:
 * Wow, first time for everything, I usually stumble at that hurdle. :-) — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 14:24, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * "3 million copies" - "three million copies"

Keep it consistent. I didn't find any other errors, but keep a sharp eye out. Cheers, Kodster ( heLLo ) ( Me did that ) 16:17, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Just went through it, its all correct now, people should stop tinkering with my numbers lol. :-) — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 16:25, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Another thing. In the "Themes and Genres" section, I don't really think it's necessary to summarize the songs. For example, "In "Billie Jean" Jackson sings about an obsessive fan who alleges he has fathered a child of hers." That sounds like there really IS "an obssessive fan who..." when really it's only part of the song. I think it's important to not have more of a "real life" POV when doing this, as opposed to the "universe" of the song. Maybe it's just me, but I don't really think that all of those summaries are really necessary for the article. Cheers, Kodster ( heLLo ) ( Me did that ) 17:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I kind of disagree, the title is called "Themes and genres", the obsessed fan thing actually happened in real life to Michael Jackson. The song is about his personal relationship with a crazy fan that stalked him for much of the 80's before she was sent to an mental home. So yes it was real life. The "Theme" of the song is about jackson's paranoia over a real life incident. :-) — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 17:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, okay. I thought that the crazy fan was NOT real. It makes perfect sense in that case. Nevermind. Cheers, Kodster ( heLLo ) ( Me did that ) 19:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * He he, a lot of people don't know its a real story. Actually the poor women is very very ill.— Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 22:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments regarding images:
 * Image:Michaeljacksonthrilleralbum.jpg is not low resolution (WP:NFCC).
 * I don't know enough about picture policy to fix that.
 * Image:Michael Jackson 1984.jpg needs a verifiable source per WP:IUP.
 * Removed
 * Image:Mjthriller.jpg description is "Michael Jackson in the frightening and exciting music video 'Thriller'" (emphasis mine). See WP:PEACOCK and WP:NOR/WP:NPOV.  ЭLСОВВОLД  talk 16:50, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed
 * I have corrected your concerns as much as I can. I don't know how to fix the album cover issue. — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 16:57, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I've reduced the resolution. ЭLСОВВОLД  talk 17:05, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Cheers, I don't do pictures, the policies are far too complicated. — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 17:12, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment. First of all, very interesting read.  Written well and seems very comprehensive. A few minor things:
 * Many references do not have a published date.
 * It quickly became the best-selling album of all time, with sales between 45 and 108 million copies worldwide. I am a little confused on the wide range of 45-108 million?  Can this not be more closely estimated?  ♫ Cricket02 (talk) 04:20, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that complement. Firstly regarding the sales; It caused edit wars, I have been blocked twice for edit warring over this issue (the second block was removed because the admin made a mistake). Archived talk page consensus said we should put the mix of sales in and let the reader decide for themselves. Happy to say there are no more edit wars on this issue and I would like to keep it that way. Regarding the publishing date; if the source doesn't give one then I cannot add it myself. I will take another look at this issue most definately and upate you on my findings. I imagine I will find it hard to find more publishing dates. — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 10:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I finished adding the dates. :-) — Realist 2  ( Who's Bad? ) 11:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Support. Excellent, thank you.  I have re-read this article and I believe the prose to be very good, interesting, and comprehensive.  I did some minor copyediting for a few punctuation issues (which I find easier to do myself than to list the problems here).  Great work.  Good luck.  ♫ Cricket02 (talk) 12:11, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Support Meets every standard of FA; good prose, comprehensive, sources good, etc. A fine article. Cheers, Kodster ( heLLo ) ( Me did that ) 22:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose per criterion 1c, which demands that the article is "factually accurate". The entire "Themes and genres" section presents the opinions of critics as though they are bona fide fact, when in truth they are merely opinions. For this reason, I feel the section is misleading, and not "accurate". For example, this statement; "Thriller refined the strengths of Off the Wall; the dance and rock tracks were more aggressive, while the pop tunes and ballads were softer and more soulful.[7]". Says who? Which critic? This is an opinion, and not a fact. It isn't a "fact" that the album "refined the strengths of Off the Wall", but merely the opinion of one critic. Each opinion should be presented as an opinion, and attributed to the critic in question within the actual paragraphs. LuciferMorgan (talk) 03:42, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I can address that issue for you. :-) — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 04:18, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe I've resolved the issue. All opinions are attributed to their respective authors. The Bookkeeper   (of the Occult)  04:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose (comprehensiveness concerns) Features just one contemporary (1983) review--the Rolling Stone one. Any reason why reviews by the NME, Melody Maker, CREEM, Q, Sounds etc aren't included here? Also not sure why reviews from websites such as Slant and Blender are included at all; surely far more respected and acclaimed publications (such as those I have listed before) should be preferred. Further, you need to differentiate between the contemporary and the retrospective reviews; not entirely sure you would want to use Allmusic's review (written at least a decade later) to back up the claim that the album's reviews upon initial release were almost entirely positive. indopug (talk) 20:01, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm also puzzled why the New York Times preview for Bad is used as a review for Thriller. indopug (talk) 20:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * NME doesn't have one I have already checked. Its been really hard to get hold of original reviews, most are contempory. I will look for more and try to find them but I really cant promise this. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 20:13, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Q and Melody Maker don't have reviews either.
 * Found original NYK review which I will add. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 20:21, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

None of the above examples you gave contain reviews on the Thriller album, I checked them all. I managed to add one from the new york times. I also checked TIME's database and they don't have one either. Not sure what you expect me to do about this, the material just isn't available im afraid, I'm not sure if you specifically found some thus opposed but I certainly can't see them. You suggestions mostly document white rock music not black R&B. Could you clarify what I should do here, cheers. — Realist 2  ( Come Speak To Me ) 23:01, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.