Talk:Bam Thwok

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Bam Thwok is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Article milestones Date Process Result April 4, 2007 Good article nominee Listed April 12, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted Current Status: Featured article

The following user(s) are actively contributing to this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources: CloudNine (talk • contribs) This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the assessment scale.

	Alternative music Portal This article is part of the Alternative music WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to Alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the Project's importance scale.
	This article is under the scope of the Pixies taskforce.

[edit] Failing GA

I have decided to fail this one for two main reasons:

• Unsourced major assertions. Right in the intro, we read that "some fans" disliked the organ solo. It's not sourced there. Nor is it sourced in the article under "Reaction". We cannot just take some editor's word for it.

  Then, footnote 2 tells us, "The organ is an uncommon element in modern music". Says who? What kind of modern music?

  "The record was the first time a Pixies record could be so widely reviewed". Because it was on the web? Long ago it was rather easy to buy Pixies' CDs and tapes. Is there a source for this? I'd like to see it.

  Debatable, subjective assertions like that do not epitomiuze the best or near-best that Wikipedia can produce.

• Clunky, awkward prose. "a band she formed of which she was the only constant member"; "Without the record company distribution, a new single would not receive as much publicity and a major release was important for a band keen to reassert their status.", and repeated uses of "the song" where a pronoun could have done. This needs a rewrite by an experienced hand.

I could also see more in this article, and some more images (maybe a screenshot of the download page? Is there a video a screenshot could be taken from? A contemporary picture of the band?) could help a bit. Daniel Case 23:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

For the record, these comments have now been addressed. CloudNine 16:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA on hold

• Although its lyrics do not explicitly mention "monsters" or a "party", lines such as "we got a lot of shakin' in our hips" suggest dancing and other lyrics loosely tie in with her original inspiration. The main theme of "Bam Thwok", goodwill, is mentioned in some of the lyrics, such as "Here's 50,000 watts of goodwill!" - This needs a reference as it currently seems like WP:Original Research Y Done

• Removed the paragraph; couldn't find references.

• the band is currently not associated with any major record label. Reference?

• Well, since their 2004 reunion, they haven't yet signed to a major record label. I can find 2004 references saying they haven't yet signed to a label, but nothing that says "of March 2007". What do you think?".

• Image:BamThwok.ogg needs a detailed fair use rationale. Y Done
• The song is an upbeat - the reference at the end doesn't say it was "upbeat" Y Done
• and a short guitar solo by Santiago begins. "begins" could be removed Y Done

Rest looks good to me, if you disagree with anything mentioned I'm open for discussion. M3tal H3ad 10:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for your review. My comments are above. CloudNine 10:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

That sure was quick :o. I guess a 2004 ref would be ok for GA, but find a new one as soon as you can. M3tal H3ad 10:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. I changed the wording, so a 2007 ref might no longer be needed. CloudNine 10:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Goodwork, and congratulations on getting Doolittle featured. M3tal H3ad 10:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Now congrats on FA, keep em coming :) M3tal H3ad 07:39, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! CloudNine 10:13, 12 April 2007 (UTC)