Talk:The Limeliters

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Biography     (Rated Start-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. Biography Portal Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia. WikiProject Roots, Folk, and Traditional music     (Rated Start-Class) Music Portal The Limeliters is within the scope of WikiProject Roots music, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide on Wikipedia to roots music, folk music and traditional music. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familier with the guidelines. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the Project's quality scale.

[edit] Rewrite?

This article sounds a lot like a PR flyer. A good thorough rewrite seems in order, taking out all the marketing hype. I'll try to do so when I can but feel free to jump in if you get to it first. --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 13:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I have to agree. I'm sure they're a fine group, but the gushing praise is a little over the top. 24.6.66.193 18:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I would agree as well. They are indeed a fine group, but as Wspencer mentions, the article as is sounds like a copy and paste from a promotional group. Talshiarr 14:04, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PR? I don't think so ...

I would disagree. I think the "fansite" tag was inappropriate for this article in the first place, and should be removed. There's no reference in the text to any fan organization, newsletter, or website.

The article is clearly informative, tells how the Limeliters got their start, who they are, a short history of the performers, and a discography. That's the standard format for the musical group articles that appear in Wikipedia, and standard for reviewers (e.g., Bruce Elder, All Music Guide; album liner notes, etc.). That isn't PR.

I think this article could easily be improved in a few minutes by inserting a few Wiki section headings to break up the text, and giving more reference citations, e.g., in the pgraf about the group's taking a break in 1965, among others. Also to add the "References" section, and a "See also" section, e.g., point to The Kingston Trio and Dave Guard, for starters.

K. Kellogg-Smith 02:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I really disagree with you. Sure, there is no direct reference to fan sites, etc., but the tone of the writing is far too casual for an encyclopedia entry, and is also pretty far removed from NPOV. Don't get me wrong, I'm a longtime fan of the group, but this article is just not up to snuff. Apart from the question of writing style, it desperately needs sourcing. --Wspencer11 (talk to me...) 17:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I did as I suggested above and formatted the original author's article with subsections, adding an infobox, and so forth. It didn't take long to do, maybe a half hour or so at the most.  I just got finished added a bit more to the lead paragraph to comply with Wiki format suggestions.  I commented out a couple of the superlative adjectives, adjectives which may have led to thinking it was fan oriented. I've also emailed Alex Hassilev to ask for a public domain photo of the current group to insert into "The Limeliters Return" section of the article.  The Limeliters were a significant folk music group of the neo-folk and folk era, and are most certainly deserving of a place in Wikipedia. K. Kellogg-Smith 16:53, 29 April 2007 (UTC)