Wikipedia:Featured article review/Music of the United States/archive2


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 3:41, 27 July 2019 (UTC).

Music of the United States

 * Notified: TUF-KAT, WP:US, WP:MUSIC

Review section
I bring forth this article to the attention of the community. Music of the United States was promoted to Featured Article status way back in 2006 and it does not meet the current, stricter FA criteria. The article has been through a previous FAR in 2008, started by the article author, that I'm bringing to this discussion because I think that the nominator's concerns were well-presented and still apply to the current article. Also, note the closing admin's ending remarks and that that discussion ended as a "default keep" because no one was interested in fixing the article.

Copying a bit from [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Music_of_the_United_States#FA_worthiness? my talk page notice],

"The most glaring issue is the failure to meet 1.c - claims must be "supported by inline citations where appropriate." This article is severely undercited for a Featured Article, as there are entire paragraphs that drone on without providing a single citation. The entirety of the Diversity section has exactly 2 inline citations, to the same two-pages. There are also lots of citations without specific page numbers like Collins, Morales, Clarke, Werner, Guralnick, etc."

I added 2 citation needed templates back in March, but I couldn't exactly tag the entire article to death. User:DrKay later removed the unsourced text. Speaking on the quality of the sources, it seems that the article relies on a weird mix of reliable sources with some random biographies from Allmusic and the like.

"The article's length at some points is also problematic. The R&B subsection is three times the length of each of the previous subsections on blues, jazz and country. Rock, metal and punk come together in one section (why?), which made me realize that it's not entirely clear how the article is organized. How are the genres listed, is what I mean. Failure of 2.b?

The "Other niche styles and Latin American music" section has 3 unsourced paragraphs. There is also repetition of ideas, like how the reader has to be constantly reminded that the United States is a "melting pot" of cultures - 5 times, to be exact. There is also some POV language and unnecessary name-dropping of artists.

Other thing that has me worried about this artice is the sheer amount of notices on its talk page regarding media files. See for instance. After my notice back in March, another bot came by to "claim" an image, so I think a media review would also be in order. To sum it up because this nomination is getting a bit long this article currently fails 1.a, 1.c, 2.b, 3 and 4 of the Featured Article criteria and does not represent the best we have on wikipedia.

RetiredDuke (talk) 21:04, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

FARC section

 * Relatively little commentary so far, moving. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:33, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Nikkimaria (talk) 03:41, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delist. No-one working on it or responding to the commentary. Sourcing, length, level of detail, weasel words and style issues. DrKay (talk) 12:48, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delist per massive citation issues. There are huge chunks without citations at all. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:52, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delist. The issues remain and have not been addressed. Szzuk (talk) 07:23, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.