Talk:List of Powderfinger awards
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Nice infobox
LOL. lincalinca 08:28, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'm glad you like it :) Sebi [talk] 10:06, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- I like it when people take something I've designed around here and replicate it for their own pages. This is the second time (that I know of) that it's been done. In response to your request to add to the page, at a glance, there's probably just some prose issues, expanding the lead a little and removing redundant duplication of facts (from the lead to the history section, you state almost the exact same thing from the last sentence of one to the first sentence of the next). And, as I've said numerous times before about Powderfinger, I'm almost certain there're more official awards the group has earned than those listed here, and that wouldn't satisfy the criterion relating to comprehensiveness. For a start, I'm sure they have won at least one Jack Award, if not more... actually, I've found a couple of them. I'll add what I have. Otherwise, I'd encourage more editors of WP:FING getting on board (ahem, giggy/H2O, slabba etc) and see if we can get a global perspective. No offence Spebi, but it's generally advised to have multiple editors to get it over the finish line. I don't know if you've tapped The Rambling Man's shoulder yet, but he's an invaluable resource when it comes to these things. --lincalinca 09:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- At your service :) Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) (Drought) 09:31, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- I've left a message at WT:FING, and I'll get ahold of TRM later. I thought I could tackle this one on my own, but meh, a little collaboration won't hurt. ;) Thanks for your suggestions, btw Linca. :) Sebi [talk] 09:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- I like it when people take something I've designed around here and replicate it for their own pages. This is the second time (that I know of) that it's been done. In response to your request to add to the page, at a glance, there's probably just some prose issues, expanding the lead a little and removing redundant duplication of facts (from the lead to the history section, you state almost the exact same thing from the last sentence of one to the first sentence of the next). And, as I've said numerous times before about Powderfinger, I'm almost certain there're more official awards the group has earned than those listed here, and that wouldn't satisfy the criterion relating to comprehensiveness. For a start, I'm sure they have won at least one Jack Award, if not more... actually, I've found a couple of them. I'll add what I have. Otherwise, I'd encourage more editors of WP:FING getting on board (ahem, giggy/H2O, slabba etc) and see if we can get a global perspective. No offence Spebi, but it's generally advised to have multiple editors to get it over the finish line. I don't know if you've tapped The Rambling Man's shoulder yet, but he's an invaluable resource when it comes to these things. --lincalinca 09:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Automated peer review
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
- There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
- Already an infobox, the process can't pick up it properly, so Done. Alternate Spebi 06:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
- Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Alternate Spebi 06:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] See also section
I've removed this section - it seems a bit pointless to have it when it contains only one link, to a page that isn't really relevant to this one. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 01:09, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, it's relevant. It includes some more information about the works of Powderfinger that earned them awards ;) Sebi [talk] 01:13, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Meh, I suppose so - I just don't like to see only one link there. What else can we add? Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 01:17, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- "See also" is generally designed for anything that would not be appropriate to include anywhere else in the article. Arguably, there's nothing else that really is suited to fit into this section. I believe this is correct in the case of this article. Ideally, most articles would only have one or two see alsos anyway. I don't know a way that the discography could be mentioned within the article without seeming overly forced. --lincalinca 05:20, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Meh, I suppose so - I just don't like to see only one link there. What else can we add? Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 01:17, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] FAFL!
Congratulations to everyone who contributed to this article in getting the 1st FA for the Powderfinger wikiproject! That's fantastic news! Slabba 05:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- FL, that is... ;) ~ Sebi [talk] 05:11, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- But yes, congratulations to everybody who pitched in and got this over the line! Now onto the discography! Lots of work to be done there first, but it should be successful with possibly just a bit more effort than this one! Then the onerous task of putting the flagship article up for FA also, but let's work piece by piece. Dream Days is probably settled enough now that we could even put it up for FAC now too. Just possibly... --lincalinca 06:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- I'm putting Dream Days up to FAC next week, once my current (SPEBI!) FAC is done. I got word from an insider that it's virtually ready ;-) — Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 07:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
- But yes, congratulations to everybody who pitched in and got this over the line! Now onto the discography! Lots of work to be done there first, but it should be successful with possibly just a bit more effort than this one! Then the onerous task of putting the flagship article up for FA also, but let's work piece by piece. Dream Days is probably settled enough now that we could even put it up for FAC now too. Just possibly... --lincalinca 06:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] A quick review, post FL
- You don't really "win" a Triple J Hottest 100 position. This should certainly be reworded in the infobox. I suggest we have another header with "entries" and "#1s", so the corresponding values will be 19 and 2. Thoughts?
- Why don't we have the tracks that made it to No. 1 (e.g. MY Happiness, These Days) ranked as awards, and all the other entries could be under nominations or something. Personally the change to the "Won" and "Nominated" cells doesn't look too good, we need to find an alternative. ~ Sebi [talk] 01:37, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- Second paragraph of lead uses the word "also" a good deal - integrate some synonyms, like "finally" and "furthermore", perhaps?
- Someone really needs to create Automatic (song)...if only we knew something about it. If it won something in 1996, then it would've been on Double Allergic, no? I dunno...what does "Engineer of the Year" (the award it apparantly won) actually represent, and how would this apply to a single? Linca says he used to have a copy of Automatic (or something like that), but I'm getting serious doubts...
- The lead says 23 ARIA noms, the infobox says 28, and I count 23. Change infobox ;-)
- First sentence of APRA awards section should be cleaned up, I think. Too informal.
- Passenger is wikilinked twice (APRA and ARIA sections)
- Weren't the Triple J DVD releases called JVDs or something, or is my memory playing up?
- Sunsets is wikilinked twice (ARIA and JJJ)
- First paragraph of Other awards and achievements section could be reworded so it doens't use "1999" twice. Suggestion:
- In 1999, Internationalist was voted one of the "Best 100 Albums" of the 1990s by JUICE magazine, whilst Powderfinger won four awards at the annual Music Industry Critics' Awards (see right).[5]
- Second paragraph; suggest rewording:
- Powderfinger have recieved four Jack Awards from bourbon whiskey producers Jack Daniels. In 2004 they won "Best Drummer" for Jon Coghill, "Best Live Performance" for the group on Rove and "Best Live Band". In 2005 they won "Best Tour Art" for their tour The Revolution.[4]
- Last sentence of 3rd paragraph doesn't really contribute much to the article; I'd remove it.
- What happened to {{commonscat}}? It was here last time I checked, and it's still on the discog.
— Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 00:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- Apart from the redundant wikilinks, the article is fine, IMO. I don't think any of the sections need rewording at all, they look fine and there aren't any prose issues. ~ Sebi [talk] 01:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- Looking better now. — Dihydrogen Monoxide (H2O) 01:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Categories: Wikipedia featured lists | Old requests for peer review | FA-Class Powderfinger articles | Top-importance Powderfinger articles | WikiProject Powderfinger articles | FA-Class alternative music articles | Low-importance Alternative music articles | WikiProject Alternative music articles | WikiProject Australian music articles | FA-Class Australian music articles | Mid-importance Australian music articles | FA-Class Australia articles | Low-importance Australia articles