Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Yesterday (song)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Yesterday (song)
Was nominated about two weeks ago (see Archived nominations), but I'm renominating it based on two facts. Firstly, nobody ever responded to my request to review the article again after I rewrote it to fix much of my bad grammar. Secondly, it has already passed through Peer review; of the three who commented on it, they unanimously agreed it should be renominated. It's probably weird renominating such a recent failure, but I think these are slightly out of the ordinary circumstances. This article's rather content-rich for an article about a song, so it'd be pretty nice to feature it (not feature as in the front page). Self-nomination, btw. Johnleemk | Talk 07:37, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Strongly support. Ambi 08:34, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Support. Incidentally, can you do one on Something too? I'd like to see that! Angmering 09:48, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Check out Something (song). I spent a good hour's work on that. Johnleemk | Talk 13:12, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Support. As I said on Peer Review, this is ready to go live. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 12:53, 2004 Aug 9 (UTC)
- Support. Like you said, content rich for an article about a song. Smerdis of Tlön 15:46, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Support. Dandrake 19:20, Aug 9, 2004 (UTC)
- Fab. Support. And peer review recommendation is an extra bonus. +sj+ 20:08, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Totally support. Whiners please line off at the pit drop zone. Denni☯ 02:21, 2004 Aug 10 (UTC)
- Nice! Support. --mav 06:29, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Is there a way to include the sound samples in Wikipedia, rather than via an outside link? Otherwise, support. Jeronimo 10:40, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Not unless somebody knows of an easy way to convert the sample's format into Ogg Vorbis. Johnleemk | Talk 13:12, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Easily done with Audacity. See Wikipedia:Sound (rewritten from scratch by me about 2 weeks ago) →Raul654 23:15, Aug 10, 2004 (UTC)
- We probably should not convert the sample, but find or make a new one. As they say here "converting from one lossy format, like MP3, to another lossy format, like Vorbis, is generally a bad idea." Dan Gardner 04:28, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Since it's just a sample, we don't have to care too much about sound quality. [[User:Sverdrup|❝Sverdrup❞]] 09:33, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for the head's up, Raul. I've added the sample to the article – can somebody please see if I did it correctly? Johnleemk | Talk 12:13, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- We probably should not convert the sample, but find or make a new one. As they say here "converting from one lossy format, like MP3, to another lossy format, like Vorbis, is generally a bad idea." Dan Gardner 04:28, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Easily done with Audacity. See Wikipedia:Sound (rewritten from scratch by me about 2 weeks ago) →Raul654 23:15, Aug 10, 2004 (UTC)
- Not unless somebody knows of an easy way to convert the sample's format into Ogg Vorbis. Johnleemk | Talk 13:12, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Not only fab, but totally gear! I am truly in awe. Support!! - Lucky 6.9 23:13, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Support... and I hope Something gets up here soon too. Lyellin 09:38, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)
- Neutral. Should we really be releasing song lyrics under the GFDL? anthony (see warning) 14:09, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
