Wikipedia:Featured article review/Blues/archive1

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

The article was removed by User:Marskell 12:35, 17 September 2008 [1].

---

Blues

Review commentary

Notified Vb, WP Music genres, WP African diaspora, WP Media, WP Chicago, WP Illinois and WP Music.
Other editors with 25 edits were also notified (Deeceevoice, TUF-KAT, Notinasnaid, Blainster, RobertG, and Cielomobile) as was the second leading talk page editor Hyacinth.

There appear to be many statements lacking citations, including two entire sections without any citations. This article seems to have been promoted when the standards for featured articles were more lax, but this article seems hardly featured-worthy with the current standards. Xnux the Echidna 16:07, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delist The article is quite informative and detailed, but it does need quite a bit of research in terms of finding WP:RS for all of the information.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:02, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

  Please see the WP:FAR instructions, delist or keep are not declared in the review phase. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

• This is a very good article that is also an important one. Many articles link to it and depend on the information being relevant and well sourced. The article lacks reference citations for many statements and also treats some hypothesis as facts. I think some work, especially with the sourcing (and removal of information without solid sources), could fairly quickly return this article to a status deserving of FA. I don't think its deficiencies are fatal. —Mattisse (Talk) 18:10, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
• Internal links are often enough either missing or, as with "chord progression" in Blues#Musical style, not at first mention. Hyacinth (talk) 15:25, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Image problems

• Image:RobertJohson.png is missing a fair-use rationale for use in this article. It is also arguable whether its use here can be justified.
• The licensing is confused on Image:Okahumkee-On-The-Ockl.jpg: it has a public domain tag plus a CC tag as well as saying it's copyrighted and used with permission.
• Image:Muddy1.png has no fair use rationale for use in this article. Again, doubtful that its use is justified (at one extreme of the debate it's just a black man holding a guitar).
• Licensing is confused on Image:Svaughan.jpg: it says copyright of Scott Newton, and "Weselex Depository Rights Reserved", in addition to a PD tag. The original upload was copyright Lloyd Litt.
• Image:Rhapsody in Blue cover.png lacks a fair use rationale for use in this article.
• Image:Tajmahalblues.jpg has three licenses; it should only have one. DrKiernan (talk) 12:53, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

FARC commentary

Suggested FA criteria concerns are referencing (1c) and images (3). Marskell (talk) 09:04, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

• Remove. Significant Image, Style, and Referencing issues as mentioned above have not been addressed. Cirt (talk) 21:41, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
• Comment. All the critics expressed here are correct. This article needs to be improved. I have added many new references to the article. They may not be enough. I however think one could remove the different banner and instead inlude specific fact tag which could help better. Thanks. Vb (talk) 08:58, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
  • I generally object if an article does not have at least one citation for almost every paragraph. Thus, I am likely to vote to remove.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:46, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
• Thanks for the improvements, but the images still need sorting out. DrKiernan (talk) 11:01, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

• Remove, numerous opinions lacking attribution, citation tags, incomplete citations, publishers lacking, numerous MoS issues (image layout, seealso templates at ends of sections), clearly needs copyediting (notice this exact text:

  Georgia also had an early slide tradition.[37] ok (Y) :D

• SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:32, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Judging the history, I assume Vb was working as an non. There was some good improvement but this is still not there and work has ceased. (Musical articles on genres, as opposed to specific bands, are difficult and usually require a team.) Removing now. Marskell (talk) 12:28, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

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