Wikipedia:Featured article review/Punk rock
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Punk rock
-
- Messages left at Punk music and Music genres. LuciferMorgan 00:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm nominating this for FAR because;
- It needs further inline citations.
- The lead needs expansion, and needs to be an adequate summary of the article. LuciferMorgan 00:44, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. A lot of inline citations have been added since this article was listed as lacking citations, and it is close to finished. With a bit more work, this article should be able to retain its FA status. Expanding the lead, a copy edit review, and finishing up the citations are in order. Sandy (Talk) 00:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Comment I agree. With one or two editors working on this, it should be wrapped up soon. LuciferMorgan 01:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Article has improved over last few days. The lead now covers most of the main content, and cites continue to be added. - Coil00 22:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Keep. Is comprensive, balanced and sourced. Lead has been expanded as mentioned above. + Ceoil 20:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- I'm unsure of trying to trace punk's roots back to the US. Punk began in the UK as far as most critics are concerned. LuciferMorgan 22:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- Lucifer, this is a can of worms. Punk was defined by the '76 UK bands, but they crystallised the lead of the Ramones and New York Dolls, as well as The Stooges and the earlier US garage bands. See the talk archives for an extended, and heated, discussion on this. + Ceoil 22:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- Fair enough, but more cites are needed. LuciferMorgan 22:18, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- Lucifer, this is a can of worms. Punk was defined by the '76 UK bands, but they crystallised the lead of the Ramones and New York Dolls, as well as The Stooges and the earlier US garage bands. See the talk archives for an extended, and heated, discussion on this. + Ceoil 22:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- Whichever way, I'm not voting Keep yet, and people don't vote until FARC.
"Punk rock may have been influenced by the snotty attitude, on- and off-stage violence, aggressive instrumentation, overt sexuality and political confrontation of artists such as The Who, the Rolling Stones, Eddie Cochran, Gene Vincent, The Velvet Underground, Alice Cooper, The Stooges, the MC5, The Deviants, and the New York Dolls. Other likely influences include the English pub rock scene, and British glam rock and art rock acts of the early 1970s, including David Bowie, Gary Glitter and Roxy Music. Early punk rock also displays influences from other musical genres, including ska, funk, and rockabilly."
May have? Says who? Which music critics? And which music critics disagree? I'd like to see citations in this specific paragraph, and also the "Characteristics" section needs more citations. Keep up the good work though. LuciferMorgan 22:18, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- Fair point, I'll find something on that one. I'd appreciate a few 'cite needed' tags else where, if needed, to focus the mind, like ;) + Ceoil 22:23, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- Add the most urgent first though, its a heavily edited article, carpet bombing might draw some reverts. If you see a lot of gaps, maybe add them in a few manageable phases, and I'll do what I can. Thanks. + Ceoil 22:28, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I'd love to add the tags, but I've been accused in the past of going overboard (see the Operation Downfall FAR). The main problem is that when you've cited something, I'll most likely scour the article for other areas that need cites. LuciferMorgan 22:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Will do. Fill whatever cites you want, and if there's some you disagree with then feel free not to fill them. LuciferMorgan 22:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks Lucifer, I'll need a few days though. + Ceoil 22:56, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ceoil, just a note to let you know, we don't vote Keep or Remove during FAR; if concerns aren't addressed in more or less two weeks, the article moves to FARC for another two weeks, and that's when you enter Keep or Remove. Sandy (Talk) 04:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ooops + Ceoil 23:59, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Ceoil, just a note to let you know, we don't vote Keep or Remove during FAR; if concerns aren't addressed in more or less two weeks, the article moves to FARC for another two weeks, and that's when you enter Keep or Remove. Sandy (Talk) 04:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks Lucifer, I'll need a few days though. + Ceoil 22:56, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- Will do. Fill whatever cites you want, and if there's some you disagree with then feel free not to fill them. LuciferMorgan 22:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
Comment I see some problems with this article right off. For one thing, the editors don't seem to understand the need to keep original research (WP:NOR out of the article, even in the lead paragraph.[1] & [2] A lead paragraph that is full of what could not be more "self-evident" is not part of an encyclopedia--encyclopedias are not insiders clubs. Punk Rock has been around for ages, there is tons of research on it, some from the late 70s even. I would like to see this article approached as if it were a serious subject, culturally relevant, and important enough to be included in an encyclopedia, not just an editors evidence of himself as if Wikipedia were a blog. Self-evidence is not part of a FA that I can see. And if a FAR is telling the editors that more citations are needed, editors should consider whether a citation is needed or not, rather than saying, no, bollocks, this could not be more self-evident."
- "...and placed emphasis on music that was fast, short in duration, and simple, often accompanied by a political or social outlook."[citation needed]
- "The punk rock movement also encompasses a punk subculture, involving youthful aggression, specific clothing styles, ideologies, and a DIY (do it yourself) attitude."[citation needed] (In spite of its self-evidence to one editor.)
- "...but its popularity was more sporadic elsewhere."[citation needed]
- "Over the course of the 1980s, various forms of punk rock emerged in small scenes around the world, often outright rejecting commercial success or association with mainstream culture."[citation needed]
- "By the end of the 20th century, punk rock's legacy had resulted in the formation of the alternative rock movement, while new punk bands popularized the genre decades after its initial heyday."[citation needed]
I had intended to go into the article and see how these other statements are supported, but learning that the first is supported by "self-evidence" showed me it would be a waste of time. This article desperately needs citations, citations that are readily available. KP Botany 15:05, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
-
- KP, agree that 'self-evident' not good enough, and thought the reversal of you cite requests was plain rude. I kind of warned LuciferMorgan above about fact tags being rv'd by others, and have sandboxed the article so that tags can be added and dealt with in peace during the FAR. Please feel free to place more requests there, as you say there is an abundance of sources to choose from.
- One thing though, I think I remember reading somewhere that you don't need to cite statments in the lead if they are ref'd further down in the main body of the article. I've searched around but can't find it again. Does any one know if this is actually true or not? + Ceoil 21:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- True. The lead is meant to be a summary of the article, so all info there should be in the article body also. LuciferMorgan 23:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
