Wikipedia:Featured article review/A Hard Day's Night (song)/archive1

Article no longer featured

Review commentary

 * Messages left at User talk:Johnleemk, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Beatles, and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs. Sandy 20:22, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm nominating this article for the same reasons I nominated 'A Day in the Life' and 'She Loves You'. These are as follows;

1) This article needs sufficient inline citations (1. c.). ALL direct quotations need to cite their sources, an example of this is quotes attributed to Beatles members.

2) A section dealing with the critical reaction of the song from esteemed critics / magazines past and present would also help the article (1. b.), and since this is a Beatles song there must be a hefty trove of possible references to use. Other non-Beatles song articles have found these, so this article shouldn't find a problem. The "Other recordings" section needs a proper intro, and all the sentences in the section need to be tied together to make a cohesive article (1. a.) which will address the disjointed prose. The chart success, or lack of, alongside the differences between versions, is a possible avenue to explore. LuciferMorgan 14:15, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The Beatles and the Papacy have really been taking a beating here recently :(. Marskell 09:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Perhaps the new lists by Project will encourage reviewers to focus on some other areas. Sandy 13:32, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
 * If they were kept up to FA standard they wouldn't take such a beating. Also, I find it saddening no Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Beatles members have even replied apart from kingboyk - if someone addressed the concerns I'd be happier than anyone to keep them from FARC. I was hoping these Beatles FA reviews would instill a Beatles fan editor with the passion to address the FA concerns, but not yet. Along with the reasons just outlined, I also want people to get the correct impression of the FA star, and the Beatles articles I assume attract a lot of viewers. I'm sorry if people think I have hidden intentions - I actually like the Beatles, Lennon being my fave of the lot. LuciferMorgan 16:04, 25 September 2006 (UTC
 * Yes, I've noticed an indifferent response too and I'm sorry about it, but there's nothing I can do; I can't force people to respond and I can't write the entire enyclopedia myself**. (Or, to quote a wonderful song by Mr George Harrison, (not that he was the first to say this of course but I'm working on a theme here!) "You can take a horse to the water, but you can't make him drink"). **I'll try, if somebody wishes to hire me :)
 * I am a little worried that we'll end up with no Beatles FAs at all, but standards are standards and we have to move with the times. But, look, I'll go to the project and scream some more. This one definitely is saveable, it just needs a few folks to dig out their Beatle books. I can but ask. --kingboyk 20:49, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Comment - A fine example of a song article, but it lacks sufficient references. A true shame, really...the article is definitely FA quality. -- Ci e lomobile talk / contribs 22:38, 29 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment - If the article lacks sufficient references, it fails criterion 1. c. of "What is a featured article?", thus making the article definitely not FA quality at present. LuciferMorgan 15:25, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment - I was actually applauding you Kingboyk, maybe you misunderstood what I was saying. I do appreciate yourself making the time to comment. LuciferMorgan 19:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * No, I didn't take any personal offence (whatever made you think I did? :)), and your point about the WikiProject response was valid. Anyway, I went to the Project and hollered but it doesn't seem to have worked. Sorry about that. --kingboyk 16:16, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - It's ok they haven't responded. I think when someone has the time, they'll attempt to address the FA issues and renominate for FA, which will be nice to see. My idea for the Beatles Wikiproject is to recruit inline citers whose contribution to the Wikiproject is adding citations (just an idea). LuciferMorgan 19:33, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Comment - Here's a reason it's not yet ready to be a featured article: The notation (sheet music excerpt) is wrong. The tonic chord is G but the melody is in C. If the song is in G, which the article indicates, then it is the melody that needs to be changed. Play it on a piano if you don't believe me. Someone should contact the fellow who put it up there - or find a notation that is right. I am new to the site and cannot do it. Jdm003 06:53, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I completely agree. I happened across that error a while ago and being new to Wikipedia just added a "correction" in the article itself; Hyacinth (properly) removed my correction to the talk page, where it has not sparked any discussion.  Seeing Hyacinth as an editor/arbitrator etc., I put a more lengthy discussion on his talk page (User_talk:Hyacinth), but he must be away for a while and has not answered.  I don't have the time to be a Wikipedian, so I leave it to others to make the necessary improvements, but leaving such a serious error in a candidate for featured article status for this long is not a good situation. AlanH212 12:38, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment This is featured article removal candidate, which means this article's status may be removed if it doesn't meet current criteria. LuciferMorgan 08:46, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

FARC commentary

 * Suggested FA criteria concerns are insufficient citations (1c), comprehensiveness (1b), and overall writing quality (1a). Marskell 08:35, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Remove As the criteria concerns I raised in my FAR nomination remain unaddressed. LuciferMorgan 16:28, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - This FAR/C has been open 4 weeks when tomorrow arrives, and none of my concerns have been addressed. I call for a quick consensus, and a closure for this FARC. LuciferMorgan 18:19, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Remove The article is still filled with fact tags. Jay32183 18:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)