Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Wiggles/archive2

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted 18:16, 18 February 2008.

---

The Wiggles

previous FAC (04:25, 3 February 2008)

Check external links

I am renominating this article because all the areas of concern in its previous FAC were addressed. In addition, I did some further copyediting and added an image that was requested. There was some feedback about the placement of the images in the "Characters" section, and I changed them, but I need further feedback about how effective it was. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 20:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Is the cultural reference section necessary, and if yes, could it be prosed-up? Same applies for honours (needs prose). dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 10:19, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I think it is, but I will make this change as necessary, since I believe that bringing this to FA is more important than my personal views about trivia sections in WP articles. I will also prose up the Honours section. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 14:33, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Done! I folded the guys' honours into the rest of the article, and created another article for the "trivia" section. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 05:54, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Support. You may wish to see WP:BUNCHED re. the links in the characters section. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 10:00, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Done again! It works great, so thanks for the input, Di. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 18:17, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Oppose: I would to see an article on the television series separate from the band itself much like Hi-5 (Australian band) and Hi-5 (Australian TV series). I know that there is List of The Wiggles episodes, but there no The Wiggles (TV series) at present. Move the information relating to the TV series to the new article so that this current article doesn't have to be categorised under Category:Australian children's television series, Category:Programs broadcast by Treehouse TV and Category:1991 Australian television series debuts -- Ianblair23 (talk) 03:39, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

The short answer to this request is, "No." If you actually bothered to read the article, or if you knew anything about The Wiggles, you'd see that unlike Hi-5, The Wiggles developed organically. They were a band before producing their TV show, unlike Hi-5, a group that was created specifically for a TV show. The Wiggles' TV series are ancilliary to their touring and recording. If an article about their series were created, it wouldn't be encyclopedic, and full of original research (see WP:NOR). I will not create such an article, even if it means that this article never becomes a FA. If you'd like, remove the categories in question.

To be honest, I don't see how this opposition has anything to do with this particular article, and how it would prevent its passage to FA. If someone wants to create the article you suggest, knock yourself out, but it shouldn't affect the status of this article. The quality of this article is substantially higher than Hi-5's articles, because, of course, The Wiggles as a band is by far superior to Hi-5. They've been around longer, their story is more interesting, and they're more significant. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 06:31, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Oppose—1a. Here are random samples from the lead, indicating that the whole text needs a good run-through by a copy-editor.

• MOS says you need to specify A$ first time (I presume from the source that they're A$ ...?).
• "Programs", not "programmes", is the usual Australian spelling. This is a rare difference with UK spelling.
• "By 2002, The Wiggles had become the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's (ABC) most successful pre-school television programmes." Do you mean "one of the most successful"? Should it be "(ABC's)?
• Remove the redundant "also".
• "America"—is that "the US", or North America? "America" is a loose term.
• "former dancer Sam Moran"—Does that mean that Moran used to dance, or that he was previously a dancer with the group? Tony (talk) 12:38, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

All the above issues have been addressed. Although this article has been previously copy-edited by the LOCE, I will re-submit it for someone else to have a crack at it. If it doesn't pass (and I highly suspect that it won't), I'll give it a break for a little while before re-submitting it. Thanks for all the input. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 20:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

• Comments left on the talk page. --Efe (talk) 08:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Efe left over 50 comments; all have been addressed. Thanks! --Figureskatingfan (talk) 04:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Comments This isn't too far off, but I did find some copyedit and reference issues:

• The infobox image's caption is not a full sentence and therefore does not warrant a full stop

Corrected.

• Please provide a source to support the alternative rock and post-punk revival genres listed in the infobox; I find those characterizations really questionable. Note the article later states "All their songs, based on pop music".

Changed to children's music.

• "The group have achieved" - subject verb disagreement
• "They have earned seventeen Gold, twelve Platinum, three Double-Platinum, and ten Multi-Platinum awards" - this needs some work. The source is inferior; it's a university's student newspaper. Further, the individual types should not be capitalized, and linking multiple words to the same article is unnecessary.

I changed the source, but to The Wiggles' homepage. I understand the policy about using the source's own webpage, but it was the best I could find and I believe the info is important and credible enough to make an exception. I will go through the article and see if I can find better sources for the other times the webpage is cited.

• Is the language construct "pre-school" common in Australia? I interpret "pre-school" as before-school. If "nursery school" is also common, I would suggest it as an alternative that's less likely to be misread.

According to this, the Aussie use is "pre-school."

• The middle paragraph of the Origins section needs to be cleaned up for overuse of parentheses.

Addressed previously.

*"The Wiggles made a decision to do not, as Cook has said, "just go down the route of what people think is kids' music"." - this needs a rewrite to fix 'decision to do not'

• "when being photgraphed with children" - typo
• "The group have always had a strict code" - subject verb disagreement
• "The Wiggles have performed 12 sold-out shows at Madison Square Garden in 2003, and have been in the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade, the first time in 2001. " - wrong tense on both verbs

See talk page for the reason for the tense use. Also see this,

• "Six Flags opened its first "Wiggles World" section in April 2007" - this needs some context; where?

Tightened this up. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 19:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

• A "Leeanne Ashley" is mentioned as the choreographer; a "Leanne Ashley" is mentioned as having acted as Dorothy; a "Leanne Halloran" is mentioned at the end as the choreographer.
• The wiggly dancers are referred to variously as (verbatim): "The Wiggly Dancers", the Wiggly Dancers, and "the "Wiggly dancers".
• Some of the references need parameter work. For example, ABC News is improperly italicized because it was set as a 'work' parameter; the same is true of references including the Australian Film Commission, ABC TV Online, MSNBC, Tv.com, and MTV.com. 'Publisher' or 'author' would be a more appropriate parameter, and would result in the proper display format.
• I'd suggest fleshing out the intro to the Characters section by reinforcing that the main 4 characters are known by their first names; I think this is important since the bulk of the article refers to them by their last names.
• Regarding the first oppose vote above, where an editor wants to see an article for the tv series: yes, that would be lovely, but I do not see that as a valid reason for opposing since this FAC is not overly laden with tv series-specific content. I can't see opposing because you don't like some of the categories on the article. Maralia (talk) 21:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

• Feedback? Have you re-contacted reviewers for a re-visit? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:05, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't appear that the nom has gotten around to my list of concerns yet. Maralia (talk) 18:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

You are correct! Real life has gotten in the way, I'm afraid. I hope to start in on 'em over the weekend. Patience, please! ;) --Figureskatingfan (talk) 19:46, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

• Closing notes; since Jan. 26, this candidacy has garnered one Support, so I'm archiving. It might be helpful to initiate a new peer review, and solicit feedback from all previous opposers before re-approaching FAC. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.