Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Selena/Archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Selena
Self-Nom Selena was a spanish singer who's life ended very short and since then she cult status in Hispanic countries and was one of the best-selling hispanic artists of all-time. I worked though the article and gravely expanded it, added plenty of refs, and it had a successful peer review I will welcome all comments to improve the article. Note I do need help copyediting the article as I'm poor on it. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 02:16, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Neutral.Looks good, but has a few minor issues. The article's naming of Selena (either as Selena or by her last name, Quintanillas) is inconsistent and feels haphazard. The tone is a bit off in spots, especially the death section. It's very close though, It can definitely be improved to FA status within the nom period. RyanGerbil10 (Drop on in!) 04:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- I fixed the first comment, I'm not sure about the second. Can you clafify please. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 04:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- <Sigh> I hate having to object on tone issues because it's so hard to make them clear. Give me a moment (or a day) and I'll put together a list of examples. By the way, thanks for fixing the naming issues so quickly. Good work. RyanGerbil10 (Drop on in!) 04:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- Well this is embarrassing... I reread the article more carefully, and discovered that instead of the article needing tone editing, I need more sleep. Sorry to have been such a bother. Support, and I'm going to bed... RyanGerbil10 (Drop on in!) 04:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- <Sigh> I hate having to object on tone issues because it's so hard to make them clear. Give me a moment (or a day) and I'll put together a list of examples. By the way, thanks for fixing the naming issues so quickly. Good work. RyanGerbil10 (Drop on in!) 04:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- I fixed the first comment, I'm not sure about the second. Can you clafify please. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 04:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support. Seems good to me! — Wackymacs 07:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose langauge is too fanish and unprofessional, some examples
- was considered a budding superstar, which jump started her career and landed her a contract, career took off, witnessed her big break, Selena's fans embraced the touching biography
- The phrasing and grammar also needs work
- When she was six she started singing and by the age of nine, her father founded the singing group Selena y Los Dinos, which she fronted.
- Meanwhile, Selena and her band continued to receive accolades; Billboard's Premio Lo Nuestro awarded them a total of six prestigious awards, including Best Latin artist and song of the year for "Como La Flor," and Coca-Cola released a commemorative bottle in her honor to celebrate their five-year relationship together.
- There are many more instances of the same kind of problems, I suggest you look for a disintereted third party for a good copyedit.--Peta 01:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Comment I removed the buddling superstar comment, but I tried to find someone in IRC to try to help me copyedit but I couldn't find anyone. I see what I can do. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 01:47, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Comment I removed the fan language. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 05:14, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- It's still packed with it; spirited and professional onstage presence, catapulted her to stardom, helped made Selena a star, helping Selena to stardom, and so on.--Peta 05:23, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- OK I removed as much as I can. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 05:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Some copyediting was done Jaranda wat's sup 04:30, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- I have no idea how to fix that, and no one will help. I need help on that before Tuesday when I leave for arm surgery. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 01:44, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Object. This article needs adequate song samples (see Genesis (band), Mariah Carey and Kylie Minogue for examples). CG 18:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- That's something I don't know how to do sorry. Jaranda wat's sup 19:08, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- You need to upload .ogg formatted samples of some songs to Wikipedia and then link to them using the correct format (look at the code on those suggested articles). There is probably a WP page somewhere about this. — Wackymacs 19:20, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Ok I uploaded one, I don't know if I did it right though, and I probaly going to upload another before the night is over. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 23:22, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Ok I loaded the second one. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 03:32, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- Song samples are not a criterion to be an FA, and are bad. There's no need to have more fair use content when you have plenty of media already. --Rory096 04:43, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support Looks like a well written article to me. --digital_me(t/c) 03:45, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- I want to support this but can't at the moment. There is overuse of passive voice and it just doesn't seem to flow well in some places. Maybe if I have time I'll try to tidy it... RN 09:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- OK - I did a whole-article pass, probably screwing everything up :D. It does come off as awfully glowing though.... EDIT: in case I don't find time to etc. I want to mention that this article is VERY good besides that point - it reads almost like a fitting tribute to the singer...RN 11:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Object. Too much fair use content. Song samples are unnecessary and long. --Rory096 04:44, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Too much fair use content is not a FA criterion. Plus it is necessary for a music article to contain some sounds to make it more understandable just like a painter article would require pictures of his paintings. In addition many featured articles have a lot of samples: Genesis (band) has 18, Kylie Minogue has 10 and Mariah Carey has 4. CG 05:47, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, FAs have to have "acceptable copyright status," which having too many fair use assertions may violate. It is not necessary to have samples, it is only helpful. Pointing to other articles that violate fair use doesn't make the point any less valid. --Rory096 05:55, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- There are 4 uses of copyrighted "fair use" material in the article, which is not excessive and they all have rationales. Song samples are useful for the reader, and thats what an encyclopedia must be. — Wackymacs 06:40, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- These samples have all good fair use rationals. And yes they are helpful and encyclopedic. CG 08:23, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- They are also unfree, while this is a free encyclopedia. Since the article was just fine without them, there's no need to have these, making the fair use rationales invalid. --Rory096 20:59, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Since when fair use content is prohibited in Wikipedia? You're making up policies. CG 12:32, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
- Rory, read Wikipedia:Fair use. — Wackymacs 13:44, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
- Of course fair use content is allowed in Wikipedia. However, when you have too much of it, it makes the fair use assertions less likely to hold up in court. Since there was plenty there before, there's no need to have these 2 extra 30 second song samples. --Rory096 04:42, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- I don't see your reasonings, they don't even make sense. Why would the record company sue because of short song *samples*, they're not the full length songs, it isn't piracy. It isn't illegal. If you are so concerned, go find some free use pictures and stop complaining. — Wackymacs 06:34, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- We're taking their copyrighted work without permission and using it anyway! That's what fair use is! I shouldn't have to find free use pictures, as it was fine as it was, with 1 free use picture and 2 fair use. That's plenty! There's no need to have 2 song samples. --Rory096 21:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia policies allows us to use fair use content as long as you provide a rationale. If you contest this policy, suggest an amendment in WP:FU not here. CG 08:16, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- I believe I've made it clear that I'm not objecting to fair use content, just needlessly putting more than is necessary in. The article was perfectly fine without two long music samples. From Wikipedia:Fair use#Policy: "The amount of copyrighted work used should be as little as possible. Low-resolution images should be used instead of high-resolution images (especially images that are so high-resolution that they could be used for piracy). Do not use multiple images or media clips if one will serve the purpose adequately." --Rory096 03:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- the policy says, as you clearly quoted just now, that copyrighted work used should be as little as possible . - It seems getting free use content for Selena is not very possible, otherwise it would be there - we can't magic free use content up, you know. — Wackymacs 06:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- The page was perfectly fine BEFORE anything was added because of comments in this FAC. Just because you can't get unlimited free content doesn't mean you can assert fair use on as much content as you want. --Rory096 04:13, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- the policy says, as you clearly quoted just now, that copyrighted work used should be as little as possible . - It seems getting free use content for Selena is not very possible, otherwise it would be there - we can't magic free use content up, you know. — Wackymacs 06:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- I believe I've made it clear that I'm not objecting to fair use content, just needlessly putting more than is necessary in. The article was perfectly fine without two long music samples. From Wikipedia:Fair use#Policy: "The amount of copyrighted work used should be as little as possible. Low-resolution images should be used instead of high-resolution images (especially images that are so high-resolution that they could be used for piracy). Do not use multiple images or media clips if one will serve the purpose adequately." --Rory096 03:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia policies allows us to use fair use content as long as you provide a rationale. If you contest this policy, suggest an amendment in WP:FU not here. CG 08:16, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- We're taking their copyrighted work without permission and using it anyway! That's what fair use is! I shouldn't have to find free use pictures, as it was fine as it was, with 1 free use picture and 2 fair use. That's plenty! There's no need to have 2 song samples. --Rory096 21:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- I don't see your reasonings, they don't even make sense. Why would the record company sue because of short song *samples*, they're not the full length songs, it isn't piracy. It isn't illegal. If you are so concerned, go find some free use pictures and stop complaining. — Wackymacs 06:34, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- Since when fair use content is prohibited in Wikipedia? You're making up policies. CG 12:32, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
- They are also unfree, while this is a free encyclopedia. Since the article was just fine without them, there's no need to have these, making the fair use rationales invalid. --Rory096 20:59, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- These samples have all good fair use rationals. And yes they are helpful and encyclopedic. CG 08:23, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- There are 4 uses of copyrighted "fair use" material in the article, which is not excessive and they all have rationales. Song samples are useful for the reader, and thats what an encyclopedia must be. — Wackymacs 06:40, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Actually, FAs have to have "acceptable copyright status," which having too many fair use assertions may violate. It is not necessary to have samples, it is only helpful. Pointing to other articles that violate fair use doesn't make the point any less valid. --Rory096 05:55, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Too much fair use content is not a FA criterion. Plus it is necessary for a music article to contain some sounds to make it more understandable just like a painter article would require pictures of his paintings. In addition many featured articles have a lot of samples: Genesis (band) has 18, Kylie Minogue has 10 and Mariah Carey has 4. CG 05:47, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Object. I like the article, but it didn't seem to tell me a whole lot about the progress of her actual career. I'd like to the "successes" section expanded some, and explain more of her significance, rather than it being a meandering discography. Rebecca 05:07, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- I will try but I really can't expand it anymore without becoming too crufty, her significance was mostly after death. Thanks Jaranda wat's sup 03:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support - looks good to me -- Tawker 21:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Support - It's pretty good...could use a bit of touching up...but I can't quite put my finger on it.....(Complain)(Let us to it pell-mell) 07:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support. Looks good to me. SushiGeek 01:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
