Talk:The Waterboys

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured article star The Waterboys 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.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 23, 2007.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-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.
Ireland Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Ireland on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-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.)
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the priority scale.
Wikipedian An individual covered by or significantly related to this article, The Waterboys, has edited Wikipedia as
Archieman (talk · contribs).
This user's editing has included this article.

Readers are encouraged to review Wikipedia:Autobiography for information concerning autobiographical articles on Wikipedia.

Contents

[edit] Working towards Peer Review readiness

I've been working on this article for a couple of weeks now, with the goal of getting it ready for a Peer Review process. One thing that needs to happen is to do further work on making the article less purely a "History of The Waterboys" (hence my addition of a section on music, with its literary and spirituality subsections). Looking at the Featured Articles on bands leads me to believe that there isn't any firm standard on what should be in a band article. See the differences between The Beatles, Dream Theater, Iron Maiden (band), The Supremes and The Temptations. What makes sense to include in this article about this particular band? I don't think we need an entire section on their logo (Dream Theater has one), so I included a couple of lines about its symbolism in literary references. The Temptations is pretty much a pure history article, Iron Maiden (band) is much the same (but with lots of lists). Do we need a "Lineup" section here? It would be absurdly long, given the thirty-some musicians that have been a part of the band at some point. Thoughts about other sections to include? Thoughts about further improvement in other ways? Jkelly 18:21, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

And truly excellent work you've been doing too. I totally agree with making the article more than just a history. I was thinking about a larger section on the sound of the band but due to the way the waterboys have changed over the years maybe it would fit better in the history than in a seperate section? I think we also need a section concentrating on individual members of the band (which could possibly include a full lineup) as more needs to be written about anto, steve etc mentioning that mike hasn't written all the waterboys songs. Something similar to the "Members of group as instrumentalists and composers" in the beatles article maybe? Another idea we could borrow from the beatles article is the pictures of the each member of the band outlining how they are as you go down the page. We couldn't do this for all the members of the waterboys but we could limit it to the really important members. We've got to decide on who they are though (Mike, Steve, Anto, Karl, Richard Naiff maybe?) and find really cool pictures. A section on influences and who the band has influenced might be a good idea too. We could mention the bands/projects that different waterboys have gone to do in that too. We've got to mention floppy hats at some point too ;-) O'Dubhghaill 20:18, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I'd love to find some not-copyrighted images for Anto Thistlethwaite and Karl Wallinger. Know any Saw Doctors or World Party fans that have images they would release under the GFDL? I just made an article for Sharon Shannon, in which I included a "fair use" image of her with what I think is a pretty solid rationale (see the caption). Coming up with a stub for Richard Naiff will take a little digging (AMG doesn't even have one line on him). We could create a List of The Waterboys members list article to link to, with a section here giving a paragraph on the names you've mentioned. I have already created [[Category:Members of The Waterboys]]. Anthony Thistlethwaite's own article is not much longer than a paragraph, though... Jkelly 22:38, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Membership section

I think that the suggestion is a very good one. I think that adding a membership section which looks something like:

Introduction... more than thirty members throughout its history... some important contributors include (in order of joining):

  • Mike Scott... chief songwriter, etc.
  • Anthony Thistlethwaite... sax solo on "song1". "song2", co-wrote "song3"
  • Kevin Wilkinson...
  • Roddy Lorimer... trumpet solo on "The Whole of the Moon"
  • Karl Wallinger...
  • Steve Wickham... pretty much solely responsible for radical sound change, wrote some instrumentals, other songs, etc...
  • Richard Naiff... going to be tough to say a lot about him, but he's now a core member...

Other notable former Waterboys members include Bill Whelan, who went on to write Riverdance, Sharon Shannon, who went on to become Ireland's best-selling traditional music artist, etc.

I don't mean to say that the paragraphs should actually be in bullet form (I just formatted that way for this comment) Thoughts? Jkelly 23:28, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Infobox band

This is just a note to express my strong objection to using Template:Infobox band in the article, in case it occurs to another editor. Leaving aside the issue of stability (see Template talk:Infobox band), the information it attempts to convey quickly for the reader is complicated enough in the case of this band that a couple of lines detailing points like "Country of origin", "Years active", "Genre(s)", etc in the lead of the article is less like to misinform or present a particular point of view than trying to cram that information into the infobox. Since the template is not a guideline given at Wikipedia:WikiProject Music, I don't feel that its inclusion is necessary for the article. Jkelly 18:48, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New reference added

Is the reference currently labelled "Album Notes" referring to the Recording Notes of The Waterboys? I assume so, but I would like some confirmation. Jkelly 18:02, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes it's the first album I was referring to O'Dubhghaill 18:58, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Thanks! Any thoughts on how the article is coming along? Jkelly 19:01, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Very well I think. I'm going to try to add a little more on the sound of the two recent albums sometime this week. Maybe we should mention somewhere about the re-issues of the old albums. I'm starting to run out of ideas though, which is probably a good sign O'Dubhghaill 19:14, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Great. The article will be at peer review a while longer. I will wait for your input (and, ideally, more outside feedback) and then apply at featured article candidates. We're at 30kb now, which is, in my opinion, very close to the ideal size for an article like this. Jkelly 19:18, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Featured article

A big well done to everyone who contributed to this article and achieved featured article status. A special thank you to Jkelly for his wonderful work. O'Dubhghaill 23:17, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the compliment, and for taking what was a stub and turning it into a real article in the first place. For future reference this is the version promoted. I'm glad that you're pleased with the outcome. Jkelly 23:19, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Influence on The Wonder Stuff

There is some confusion, at least on my part, about the band / Scott's influence on members of The Wonder Stuff. Our reference is this:

http://www.tastyfanzine.org.uk/ints32%20nov04.htm

but User:SPANA argues that Gelb is not part of The Wonder Stuff, and it should instead read:

and Miles Hunt of The Wonder Stuff[1]

Can someone help sort out who Gelb is, and if there is any reference for influence on Hunt? Thanks. Jkelly 22:18, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

My bad. A closer reading of the reference shows that User:SPANA is right. Jkelly 00:32, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Too close to heaven/Secret life

Can anybody explain to me why Too Close To Heaven is listed under the regular Waterboys studio albums, while The secret life of the Waterboys is listed under the compilations? Both albums are made up from alternative versions and outtakes from previous albums. The Secret Life... is based on the three earliest records, while Too Close... is based on Fisherman's Blues. However, both records share the same idea, so I think they should both be listed either under the studio albums or under compilations. Does anyone agree? Brynnar 12:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I suspect that this was based on how All Music Guide classifies them. We should double-check. Jkelly 19:10, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
The only reason I can think of, why AMG is separating these two albums, is that the first is based on outakes of 3 albums in a period of 5 years (1981-1985), which can be considered a compilation, while the second is based on outakes from only one record, thus being an album in it's own right. If that is the argument which most people (and AMG, which I think is considered far too holy a reference for Wikipedia) have, then I am very willing to let it rest. --Brynnar 07:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bootlegs

I just removed the addition of a new "bootlegs" section, as we don't list these in a band's discography. If a reliable source has discussed the phenomena of Waterboys bootlegs, that should be included in the article, however. Jkelly 19:10, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry didn't know about this policy, I'd seen bootlegs mentioned as well in other articles (for example R.E.M._discography), so I was not aware of this. I mentioned two of them them also in the article about the album The Live Adventures of the Waterboys, since I thought it was relevant for this album and because of this I included the bootlegs in the main Waterboys-article. Brynnar 07:05, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
No need to apologise, and I wouldn't call it a "policy" so much as a loose consensus. There was a tiny bit of conversation about bootlegs in general a few months ago at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums. I am surprised to hear that bootlegs have shown up in discography list articles. Do we have a source for the bootleg information, and is there anything at that source that seems notable enough to include either here or in the album articles? Jkelly 17:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I can't think of any reliable source. After all, most of the bootlegs are unauthorized and therefore there are no official lists. What I usually refer to is this site, which not only shows the regular releases, but also has a good database of the "illegal" releases. Brynnar 18:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Archieman

There's an interesting blog post by Mike Scott on http://www.myspace.com/mikescottwaterboys regarding his recently reverted edits to the Waterboys article. --PaulGarner 17:07, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Date specific link to the blog entry to save people wading through all the entries that have been made since - http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&FriendID=71722921&blogMonth=1&blogDay=6&blogYear=2007 Unfortunatley Wiki appears to have blacklisted blog.myspace.com but allowed www.myspace.com, hence my textual representation of the URL. Comments on this blacklisted URL are sought here. John 18:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Conveniently, he gave us a source for a few of the more important corrections by posting that blog entry. Jkelly 19:31, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
This is fairly amusing. Is the problem is that he tried to do so anonymously? If so, it's roughly the same as if a writer visited a public library and "corrected" the printed edition of his book with a pen. It would be considered vandalism and the book would be replaced. On the other hand, if he created a Wiki login...who'd believe that it was him rather than an overzealous fan?K8 fan 17:01, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Libraries don't expect any kind of corrections to their collection at all, whereas we absolutely encourage it, so the analogy doesn't work that well. I'd say that, ideally, it doesn't really matter who is editing, as long as they have reliable sources to go along with their additions and can adhere to our content policies, but there is a case to be made that I'm wrong about that. As it happens, most of the changes that weren't altering of direct quotes have now been incorporated into the article, because sources for them have been identified, so, in the end, I'd say that the article has been improved, and that is what counts for us. Jkelly 18:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
http://arts.guardian.co.uk/filmandmusic/story/0,,2040025,00.html may be of interest Me677 09:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I came here to add that! I wonder how many other people will be suddenly drawn to this article as a result of it... Tim 17:27, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I was, and I've added the article to Mike Scotts page :-). Unless it's been removed already, of course ;-) Highly amusing incident if you look at the history; if I can paraphrase - Editor1:"Mike Scott is divorced", MS:"Mike Scott is married", Editor3:"Mike Scott is divorced" Editor3:Oh....err.... you are Mike Scott ! John 18:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)