Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Paul McCartney/archive3

Paul McCartney

Paul McCartney (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Paul McCartney/archive1
• Featured article candidates/Paul McCartney/archive2
• Featured article candidates/Paul McCartney/archive3

Nominator(s): — GabeMc (talk) 06:24, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because after implementing the previous FAC suggestions, and a thorough copyedit, I believe it is now up to standards. — GabeMc (talk) 06:24, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Comments

• Given that this is written in British English, endeavor should be spelled as endeavour under '1960–1970: The Beatles'.
• Again "New York theater", should be New York theatre?
• Plural of bongo is bongos, not bongoes
• "and earned Martin a grammy for his orchestral arrangement", shouldn't the g in Grammy be in caps?
• "Which faired much better", fared
• "he correctly perceives will give him clarity for melody without rendering his sound to thin for groove" → too thin
• "If I had to pick one elecric guitar", spot the spelling mistake -- Lemonade51 (talk) 13:32, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments Lemonade51, I believe the above concerns have now been resolved. — GabeMc (talk) 21:58, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

• Comment: I fixed some of the Americanisms with a script. One comment I have is that the HarvErrors is showing a few errors, let me know if you need help fixing them. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:40, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
• There's a citation to "Miles 1989, pp. 84–88.", but I don't see any sources from Miles in 1989 in the bibliography, typo? ditto for "MacDonlad 2005, pp. 133–134." Otherwise the Harverrors are cleared up.
• Also, I don't see any citations to Benitez 2010 or Davies 2009, might want to move them to further reading. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:25, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments Mark Arsten, and for your help fixing the cites, and clean-up. The Miles cite was intended to be 1997, and MacDonald was misspelled. I think that should clear up the HarvErrors you brought to my attention. I also moved Benitez and Davies to further reading. Thanks again! — GabeMc (talk) 23:54, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Comment, leaning to oppose at present

The prose is wobbly in parts. I'll need two or three goes at this, and here's the first:

• Childhood

• Second para leaps from 1952 to 1961 and back to 1954.

I'm not sure what you mean here, the second graph in "Childhood" goes from 1947 → 1952 → 1953 → 1954, and does not mention any dates in the 1960s. — GabeMc (talk) 23:31, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I see, you mean the mention of his A-level exams at age nineteen, okay, it's fixed now. — GabeMc (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

• The first member of his family to own a car, his mother rode a bicycle – not clear who was the first member with a car – McC or his mother.

Fixed. — GabeMc (talk) 23:31, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

• an early memory her leaving – missing an "of"?

Fixed. — GabeMc (talk) 23:31, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

• he traded it for a £1 – who traded it – McC father or son?

Fixed. — GabeMc (talk) 23:31, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

• Musical career
  • fête – I prefer to use the circumflex, but I believe the MoS doesn't. You might like to check.
  • Cavern club – as "club" was part of the place's name I think you should capitalise it
  • produced what many critics consider to be some of their finest material - I entirely concur, but you really must have a citation or two for this
  • the stand-out track "Maybe I'm Amazed" – citation needed
  • its a "one-man album" – it is (or at a pinch it's, but that really won't do for a Featured Article)
  • Bill Harry. In 1971 he collaborated with her – who did, Harry or McC?
  • born to the McCartney's – why the apostrophe?
  • the later involved McCartney's – doesn't make sense. Do you mean "the latter"?
  • Which fared much better – very odd to start a sentence with this pronoun
  • over the course of just two days – editorialising a bit; perhaps lose the "just"
  • Liverpool Oratorio – prose is fine here, but I think we really ought to have a sentence or two on its critical reception
  • Prince Charles awarded him an Honorary Fellowship of The Royal College of Music – surely the RCM awarded it and the Prince of Wales presented it
  • encouraged to do so by his late wife Linda – via a medium or before she was late?
  • seventeen-month long battle – trouble with hyphens here; you could just blitz the "long"

That's all for now. More shortly. In the interests of full disclosure I should mention that I went to the same grammar school as McCartney (but later) and had the same English master, A J (Cissie) Smith (a distant relation of George Harrison, I believe), in whose honour I contribute these pedantic quibbles. – Tim riley (talk) 19:26, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your helpful and insightful comments Tim riley. I believe I have now resolved all the above concerns, and I look forward to your further comments. Thanks for your time, the article is much improved due to your effort. — GabeMc (talk) 01:06, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

I am so sorry for the delay in submitting my second batch of suggestions. I am snowed under at present, but I promise to do my very best to have more comments within the next few days. Tim riley (talk) 19:20, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

No worries, no hurries, thanks for your time and effort! — GabeMc (talk) 23:35, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Oppose per choppy prose and punctuation. I will give a more detailed rationale later. --John (talk) 09:44, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

• Comments
  • "texture resona around" resonated? check source
  • "facination faded fast" check source; fix or add [sic] – Ling.Nut (talk) 15:22, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments and copyedits Ling.Nut3, I have fixed the above concerns and look forward to any further comments you make. — GabeMc (talk) 23:35, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Comment In the lead section: "According to the BBC, his Beatles song 'Yesterday' has been covered by over 2,200 artists—more than any other song." This is a statement of fact, not opinion. If there is no serious dispute about it, it need not and should not be attributed in the lead. If there IS a serious dispute about it, it should not appear in the lead. My guess is that the former is true, and "According to the BBC" should be cut. DocKino (talk) 02:15, 8 June 2012 (UTC)