Wikipedia:Peer review/King Crimson/archive2

King Crimson
I am pleased with the recent GA pass this article received; it's a milestone but there's still considerable distance to go before this is a featured article, which is the stage I want to get it to. The user who passed the article said that with a few improvements, featured article status could be achieved. The following issues were highlighted:


 * Not all of the citations use the citeweb template
 * The 80s, 90s, and 00s sections are too short and not detailed enough
 * The lead section should have another paragraph

For featured article status, I believe we'd require:


 * More images with appropriate fair use rationale
 * Samples of the band's music
 * A general fleshing out of the information in the paragraphs, expanding them and adding more detail from the sources that are used in the article and elsewhere
 * Possibly a new paragaph? I don't know what subject it could be on, but the featured article Genesis (band) for example has sections on album art, and criticism - neither of which I feel I could write a whole paragraph on.
 * A check for gaps in the copyedit

Thanks.

--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 12:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Per WP:LEAD boost the lead up so that it "capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article, establishing context, summarizing the most important points, explaining why the subject is interesting or notable".
 * Fair Use images are not encouraged in featured articles. Look for free images like this one at flickr (email the uploader to licence it under GFDL here or for permission to use it) or from other fans of the band.
 * The Waterboys would be a feature article to follow. --maclean 07:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't see how having one single picture of Tony Levin would be that useful in a King Crimson article. The Radiohead article, which is almost FA, seems to have freely licensed images of the band members taken during concerts. I myself don't have any pictures of the band members... that's gonna be difficult.-h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 08:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Do you think a paragraph about the band members in the King Crimson article, like the one in The Waterboys, would be useful to replace the section about band members that currently works as a list? I could probably do that quite easily...--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 14:39, 27 June 2007 (UTC) - Done.
 * The audio clips all need fair-use rationales. It may also be that seven of them is more than a "minimal use" as required by our non-free content criteria. It's not really clear to me that each of these songs is the subject of critical commentary within the article; this might simply be a matter of rearranging where they are placed among the prose a little bit. (ESkog)(Talk) 16:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I think five audio clips are necessary to demonstrate the diversity in sound that the band had at different stages.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 15:34, 29 June 2007 (UTC)