Talk:Crowded House/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Post Crowded House Careers?[edit]

Should this now be renamed to reflect that it is a period of time between the original end of the band & the reforming??

Vandalism[edit]

Right, so people are constantly changing this article to either New Zealand group or Australian group, probably depending on which side of the Tasman they are from. Needless to say, this is stupid, and every time I see it, I change it back. So if it's you (however unlikely it is that a vandal will read a talk page), please STOP! You won't win. Willnz0 09:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Album pages next[edit]

Okay, I'm pretty much done. However, there are still the album pages that have not yet been created. I'll get to them as I have time, but anyone else can feel free to jumpstart the process. Shigpit 12:28, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

AUS or NZ??[edit]

While Neil Finn was born in NZ, he was living in Melbourne when Crowded House were formed and the other two original members were born in Australia - this should justify them as an Australian band. However Mark Hart was born the US and Peter Jones was born in the UK. At one stage (late 1994) Crowded House consisted of: one member born in Australia (Nick), one born in NZ (Neil) one born in UK (Peter) and one born in the US (Mark).

I'm quite happy with the way it is at the moment ie Australiasian band, and country in the box listed as both. Willnz0 01:51, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
I think that the important thing is where the band started not where the lead singer was born. No-one considers INXS a Canadian band because of that new singer or Cold Chisel to be Scottish because Barnesy was born in Scotland. John Butler was born in the US (even has the accent) yet JBT are considered an Australian band. Why should Crowded House be any different? --Mdhowe 01:16, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, I personally think it should be New Zealand (based on the fact that Neil Finn, their principal songwriter, is a New Zealander), but I recognise that there were also members from Australia so I think it's acceptable to have it listed as Australasian - which is certainly true. We don't need to be more specific than that. Willnz0 03:34, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Calling it an Australiasian band is a bit stupid IMO. Why not call it an Australian based band, or a band formed in Australia. Just like the AC/DC article, AC/DC isn't a Australian Celtic Band. Jabso 04:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
How about a band with Australian and NZ members? pfctdayelise

(translate?) 05:27, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

How about "Formed in Australia and led by NZ Musician Neil Finn"
Actually, I like that idea, as it provides more information while still being accurate. If no one objects within a few days I'll change it. Willnz0 07:07, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Couple of issues[edit]

I'm not going to change them yet, but I have a couple of issues with some of the information in this article.

1. I wouldn't describe Crowded House as a 'rock' band,
2. Is WWY Byrds influenced? Even if we decide it is, should such a statement really be in the opening paragraph of an article? It would be better to have it in the influences section.
3. The 'farewell to the world' concert shouldn't be listed as it is. At the moment it makes it look as though this is an album due to the layout (the other six headings in that section are all albums). Maybe there should be a new 'tours' section? Willnz0 01:58, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
What about "locked out" that can described as rock (there are at least a few others).--Mutley 10:30, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I agree, they certainly have some rock-sounding songs, but that doesn't necessarily make them a rock band. I'm gonna change it to rock / pop, for the moment at least. Willnz0 05:30, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


Can you simply change the country then from New Zealand to Australasian??

Aus/NZ charts[edit]

Someone should add the australian and new zealand chart positions to the singles discography

Yes 'someone' should. Any takers? Willnz0 09:53, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


US charts[edit]

Looks like there were more US singles released than what's listed? See the singles section at: http://www.etext.org/Mailing.Lists/house/ch-discography.html

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.18.129.128 (talk) 14:34, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

More Background on the Portsmouth Sister Madly Recording[edit]

I was at the Portsmouth Guildhall concert mentioned in the article and afterwards a couple of us headed back to the kitchen to say hello, after a maze of tunnels we found the signs marked "Catering Disaway" in a font just like on the cover of Woodface. There was only one staff member left and she helped us to the exit, just as Neil Finn and Nick Saymour also departed, to go and meet the folk who'd gone around the back of the guildhall to wait. Whilst Nick and Neil mingled and chatted, there was no Paul Hester. In passing I asked Neil where he was and he mentioned that he was on the phone to his missus and alluded to the recent birth of his daughter, suggesting that touring was the last thing he really wanted to be doing. I recall they were on a very tight schedule because the "locked out" video had to be recorded the next day, 200Kms away, somehere near Port Talbot in South Wales. Thinking back, I got the set list too, perhaps I'll dig it out and scan it... --Ear1grey 21:57, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Farewell to the World[edit]

No mention of the live album coming out soon. http://www.amazon.com/Farewell-World-Crowded-House/dp/B000G8NW6K/sr=8-1/qid=1162989550/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-9023002-6488051?ie=UTF8&s=music

POV?[edit]

Is this segment

Hester had clearly been disenchanted for some time, if you listen to the live version of "Sister Madly" that came with the limited edition "Recurring Dream" (recorded at Portsmouth Guildhall on the "Together Alone" tour) it's clear that something is troubling him. Although they finished the tour with session drummer Peter Jones, Neil's heart was not in the work.

compliant with WP:NPOV standards? I don't think so. Feel free to discuss. Aldango 05:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree--it's POV, and it's unsourced. Can someone attribute these opinions to a published source? If not, I'd like to rewrite that pair of sentences. DoorsAjar 19:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Sentence not about CH[edit]

I removed a sentence from the CH subsection of History: "The Māori-strum-rhythm was also used for the song "Alta Marea", by the Italian singer-songwriter Antonello Venditti." Many songs have used a "Māori strum" rhythm. Unless "Alta Marea" was described in published sources as influenced by DDIO, I wouldn't consider it relevant to the article. Opinions? DoorsAjar 20:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Crowded House-Woodface (album cover).jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Crowded House-Woodface (album cover).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Crowded House-Together Alone (album cover).jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Crowded House-Together Alone (album cover).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Infobox images[edit]

If you add a new image to the infobox, then please move old images to a different part of the article so they aren't "lost". .--Mutley 05:39, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Good article nomination[edit]

An excellent job. Thoroughly researched, tastefully illustrated, and intelligently written. It reflects a deep understanding of the band without suggesting a one-eye devotion to them. The use of redirects to related articles is welcome, particularly in an article of this length. It certainly rates as an example of a good Wiki article. Grimhim 12:01, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, we have taken one step forward and two steps back. We've got the GA, but we have been tagged for references. I've thoroughly gone through the history and bio info to reference as much as possible, but have yet to do so for the style section. I'll get to that. Oh well, at least it'll make matters easier for getting to WP:FA when we get around to that. --lincalinca 13:24, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, that's the best way to look at it. Let me know if I can help with anything. The Rambling Man 13:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, it looks like they've done a transcript for the Denton episode, so that's cool. A more reliable source, now! I'm working on getting more sources, but mostly, the history section seems to be done. Would you mind {{fact}} tagging anything you feel isn't addressed, TRM? Thanks. I'm off to bed! --lincalinca 13:39, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia (and this article indirectly) was mentioned during the Denton Episode as well --Mutley 09:23, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Some issues[edit]

This article doesn't quite satisfy all the criteria. The first issue is with images. The logo needs an expanded rationale (see WP:FURG). Image:Ch temple sleeve.jpg is not appropriate for use in this article, nor are any of the album covers listed in the image gallery. The copyright tag (which they are all accurately tagged with) states that it is only appropriate to use those images to illustrate the audio recording in question. For the purposes of GA (and perhaps all of Wikipedia articles), it is only appropriate to use album cover art in the article of that album.

Another issue is references. The article isn't poorly referenced, but it could use some additional citation. Chart placement, for example, should be referenced. Additionally, citations need to be to reliable sources that verify the claims made in the article. Leading to the main page of a website that mentions nothing regarding the topic of the article is not appropriate. Each reference should also include all available information listed at WP:CITE.

Please take the time to address these issues and bring the article up to GA standards. If you have any questions, feel free to drop by my talk page. Lara♥Love 02:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Lara
Thanks for your review of the article. I agree that generally, it would be superfluous to include images that cannot be simply discussed, but the reason that these images are displayed as a gallery (though, not using the wiki-gallery format; I'm not a fan) is to show the viewer/reader a cmparison side-by-side to display the commonness and dis-similarities that applies between each cover, as, unlike many artists, the artwork is a crucial part of who the band is, not as crucial as the music, but coming in a close third, following the synergy of the grup. This is something that's directly referenced and frankly speaking, it's not good enough to separate the images forcing the reader to "take your work for it" that there is an affinity between the artiworks in question. For accessibility, it's much more approrpriate that the images be placed together for the direct access for comparison. The fair use rationales provided more than satisfy the necessary guidelines (i.e. international copyright guidelines, the unnecessary application of US Copyright guidelines and even passes the requirements of WP:FURG, and though the latter two are conformed within the use in this article, ultimately they're unneccesarily so, as the International Copyright law is what applies to items that are subject to Australian copyright law, but nevertheless, even still, these easily pass FURG). I'm sorry if I come across as terse or discivil. It's not my intent, but I am firm in my position on the matter. As to the image of the band from the sleeve of Temple of Low Men, I really don't know why I haven't taken it out sooner. It hasn't really ever served any urpose on the article, and so I will remove it, though I do intend to replace it with another image from the same era, so for now, I'm just going to quote it out (not that that would concern you, I imagine).
One thing I need to ask about is this: Leading to the main page of a website that mentions nothing regarding the topic of the article is not appropriate.. Which reference does this? I'm more than happy to amend/replace/remove as necessary where the reference is null/void/inaccurate/nonexistent. --lincalinca 11:05, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Featured Article Candidate discussion[edit]

The following is transcluded from Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Crowded House. If you wish to contribute to this discussion, please edit there. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Crowded House

Featured Article Nomination discussion[edit]

The following is transcluded from Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Crowded House/archive1.

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 02:18, 9 September 2007.


Crowded House[edit]

I, along with other members of the Crowded House WikiProject have thoroughly copyedited the article, as well as implementing much in the way of references, both in the way of further reading and inline reference citations, and we believe the article ready to be a Wikipedia Featured Article. --lincalinca 03:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Careful not to overlink. I noticed Neil Finn and New Zealand linked twice in the first two sentences (I fixed those cases). Might want to double check that this isn't the case throughout the whole article. It would be tiresome on readers' eyes. =) Also check that you're consistent when referring to the band as either singular or plural: you start with "Crowded House is" but later use the plural. Pick one and stick with it throughout the article. 69.202.41.119 02:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Forgot to mention: I really like the layout of the "Band members" section. It looks great! 69.202.41.119 02:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comments - this one is definitely doable and should get over the line but some stuff needs to happen first. I'd agree with the stuff in the link to Lara Love's talk page above. More tags would be nice. Overall the prose is not bad but lacks a little something which I am having a hard time defining - it seems to lapse into a tone which may be a little informal or band/music jargonistic. I will get specific examples - tweak these and you'll be alot closer to FA. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Comment: I didn't initially write the whole article. Little by little, I've worked my way through copyediting and re-copyediting the existing texts that were in the article. You may be lapsing between my text and the original (I sure hope mine is the definition of the better). lincalinca 02:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
They released their eponymous debut, Crowded House, in June 1986. - add debut album (yeah yeah I know, you and I know it but think for someone who doesn't know 'em)
I actually removed that just the other day. I have a thing against having too many adjectives (debut is both an adjective and nounal) but if you feel this descriptor needs to be there, I'm happy to replace it. lincalinca 02:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Although critics were impressed, the album was not as accessible as their debut. - I sort of know what "accessible" means but it shouldn't be in an encyclopedia - can you define it (now where's a rock thesaurus when you need one?)
Haha. Rock thesaurus would probably define it as something even more ambiguous. I think for encyclopedic prose, I'll change it to "was not as well received commercially". lincalinca 02:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
After a month, Seymour initiated contact and the two agreed to bring Seymour back. - erm, reword so there's only one seymour...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:33, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Faced with some time off,.. - comes across as a little informal - rephrase?
The first para from From three piece to four piece (1991–1994) section is a bit rambling and could be rewritten more crisply.
Hmmm. I stewed on this and this was the best I could think of. This basically was the second "era" for Crowded House when they officially became a four piece for the first time in their recording career. I was trying to move away from the album-titled sections, and this seemed to describe the Together Alone and Woodface era better than anything else. I'll think of something. Another thought I had was "Two Finns and a Hart" but that seemed cornier than maize. I want the section to articulate that the group was no longer a three piece, but didn't know how to express that. Any ideas? lincalinca 02:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
The next sentence has 5 clauses. These recording sessions mixed with a few songs from the earlier sessions yielded Woodface, which was released in July 1991 featuring seven songs written jointly by Tim and Neil Finn together, most of which had the two performing harmonied vocals, and featured the sombre "All I Ask" performed solo by Tim, which was later featured on AIDS awareness commercials in Australia. - I think splitting it into a couple of smaller sentences is needed
Sounds fine to me. Makes perfect sense.lincalinca 02:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
..multi-instrumentalist Mark Hart of Supertramp.. -these descriptors need to go where he is first mentioned - 2 lines previously.
Sure.lincalinca 02:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
also - it leaves one hanging a bit as to why Tim Finn was asked to leave - is it written somehwere?
I couldn't find it. I know it's been mentioned in a few articles and a few interviews, but the descriptions seem contradictory, so I didn't want to give information that could be inaccurate because of the differences between the sources. I could go with the "Something So Strong" description, but Neil Finn just in May talked about it on NZ radio and it's a slightly different story. --linca 02:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Wasn't it because Tim was used to being a "Front man" during gigs and he had to take a lesser role during Crowded House? --Mutley 02:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

linca

How about prefacing the two differing versions with "Differing stories/versions exist as to why...." - and then mention both. I thought it'd be a key point given Tim Finn's stature etc. its ok to give two versions and I like the idea of an article giving alternate versions and not presenting info as canon.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:47, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
That's a good idea, and yes Mutley, the version that is in the book is that Tim was used to basically runnign the show, after taking over from Phil Judd in 76, and returning 15 years later as a "member" rather than a "leader" didn't wash well with him. This caused disagreements between him and Neil, and Neil, wanting to protect the friendship they'd restored after the distance they'd developed between themselves, decided it would be better for Tim to leave, to which Tim agreed (this is my paraphrase). The way Neil told it earlier this year (in the Denton or NZ radio interview, from memory) was that Tim decided to leave after not turning up to a gig one night. I also read this about 6 years ago, about when One Nil was about to come out. This resonates with me as a harsh story to tell, and possibly may be considered salacious or libelous, for the wiki page without strong references, and I don't have any. Idon't even want to suggest the story on the main page without said references, however I don't want to use the other story for the simple fact that it sounds a bit "convenient" and a bit warm and fuzzy, which, from following the history f the brothers, is likely to be untrue in favour of the "risky" one. For this reason, I want to keep it as it is until I can get firm info (maybe if my magazine can get me an interview with Finn in October when they're here - which they've told me they will, but who knows; they didn't come through on John Mayer - I'll ask him about it. He might be able to shed some light directly to me). --lincalinca 11:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
All the band's members were on board, including Hester and for the sake of reminiscing, the group also called upon Peter Jones and Tim Finn to make guest appearances - bolded bits are a bit too informal and the latter probably redundant.
Sure. lincalinca 02:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
...various different... -redundant - choose one adjective here.
had all reconnected with one another - gah! rephrase - too warm and fuzzy...

OK - what is a dealbreaker - the book ref (Something so strong) needs the rest of the details (isbn yada yada) and should be moved to a cited text subsection of refs and the page numbers as the individual inline refs.

The ISBN is quoted. I added that source there a while ago. Maybe someone removed it. I'll double check. I'll update all these applicable changes and get back to you. lincalinca 02:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

The 2 books I presume have been use - the individual pages cited should be inline refs too.

The books used are both well over 250 pages, and the references are comprised from throughout, not necessarily from any particular part, so I'm not sure how to go about this, since we'd end up with about 60 pages being referenced, sometimes several pages cites for each individual reference. If this is essential for FA, I'm happy to do it, but my copy's not easily accessible to me (it's in an archive box along with most of my books, since they're all OCRed onto my computer, so I don't have page numbers listed there). The reason I mention this is that I may not be able to appease this request for a couple of weeks, since my archives aren't in Melbourne, they're in Sydney. lincalinca 02:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
That sucks - sorry - look it'll probably be here for a couple of weeks and hopefully someone else can help out. Good luck. If you scroll down to the bottom of Amanita phalloides you'll get an idea what I mean. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:47, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
As a compromise, can I put the chapter numbers? It's going to take me a while even still, but it means that the general information provided can be there, meaning I can also still use duplicated references where applicable, though not as often. lincalinca 08:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Chapter numbers is definitely better than the current. So go right ahead. Overall see what consensus is - I can't speak for others.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:50, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.

Transcluded by shaidar cuebiyar ( talk | contribs ) 03:22, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Recurring mention of Eddie Vedder[edit]

Someone keeps editing that Eddie Vedder sang backing vocals on "Everything Is Good For You". He didn't and there's no documented evidence to prove otherwise. Iarlafrenz 20:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Check the sleeve and the music video. It's even mentioned in the book "Something So Strong".

I'm looking at the sleeve - He doesn't sing on it. It's not mentioned in the book "Something So Strong", and the reference attributed to it in Wikipedia is erroneous. It's not mentioned in that article. The flip side of "Everything Is Good For You" in some markets was a live recording of the Split Enz song "History Never Repeats", performed by Pearl Jam with Neil and Tim Finn - but regardless of any other musical relationship between Neil Finn and Eddie Vedder - Eddie Vedder did not sing backing vocals on "Everything Is Good For You" Iarlafrenz 04:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Which sleeve are you looking at? The one for Recurring Dream? It's clearly there. He's listed right after Paul Hester being listed as playing drums (which isn't with the others because he didn't consider himself a band member any more by then). The standard practice if an item of information is disputed on Wikipedia is to place a tage next to it indicating that citation is needed. This can be done using the tag {{fact}}. If the fact cannot be referenced within seven days, you're within your right to remove it, but I can provide about 5 references to this, some audio, some written and I even have a photo of Vedder and Finn in the studio togetherfor the song's recording. I also have a newspaper clipping at home from an article about it where it was first announced that Vedder would appear on the song (it's from the Daily Telegraph in 1996, but I still have the clipping at home, somewhere). lincalinca 03:08, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Former members vs Former Additional Musicians[edit]

I was a full member of the band from day one, Neil and Paul were very explicit about it and I would not have been interested in joining as just a hired hand. The name change was irrelevant, all other histories, both official and unofficial, list me as an original member. Rather than edit it myself I thought I'd ask Lincalinca to either justify that decision or to correct the recent change.

Craig Hooper 12:22, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow, I'm somewhat in awe that you'd edit here. I'm happy to adjust your position. The reason I didn't list you as a full member was that you're listed as a full member of The Mullanes and that was the way I understood it to be. Just from curiosity, is there any chance you can indicate anything more about yourself for me to put onto your article? Anything else you can add to the mix also? (A photo of yourself, especially with the band, licenced under Creative Commons would be fantastic, if I'm not over-reaching the mark). Thanks for the info. I'll update accordingly. --lincalinca 04:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

GA Reassessment[edit]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Crowded House/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:02, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria[edit]

Symbol unsupport vote.svg In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of August 17, 2009, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR.

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    This artcile could do with some serious copy-editing, the prose is very choppy, possibly thye reult of a lot of seperate editors over time. I would judge that it is borderline as to whether it meets the GA criteria. Clumsy and repetitive phrasing. Please go thorugh it line by line.
    Examples: The album sold well internationally, in contrast to its American success. What on earth is that supposed to mean?
    These recording sessions were combined with songs from the earlier sessions yielded Woodface. missing pronoun
    In June 1987, the album finally climbed to the top of the Australian charts at #1, taking the place from Whispering Jack by John Farnham after several weeks in the position ????
    Mixture of past and present tense and a tendency to verge on weasel words. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
     Done --Mutley (talk) 13:49, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    ref # 3[2]is a sort of wiki, little evidence of editorial control, this has been discussed several times ta the RS noticeboard, not a reliable source; ref #5 [3] is someone's personal web page, not a RS; ref #7 [4] doesn't mention Crowded House; ref #10 [5] is a dead link; ref #11 amazon is not a RS for casting, IMdB could be good for casting details; ref #13 [6] is a dead link; ref #14 redirects top [7] which doesn't support the statement; ref #15 [8] doesn't mention Crowded House; ref #16 [9] leads to a 404 page; ref #17 is a dead link; ref #18 [10] leads to a blank page; The latter part of the article has hardly any references. As it is almost entirely unreferenced, I am going to delist immediately.
     Done--Mutley (talk) 03:39, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

As the artcile is almost entirely unreferenced, i am going to delist immediately. major contributors and projects will be notified. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I have renominated the article to be reviewed for good article status--Mutley (talk) 07:44, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Transferred manually.shaidar cuebiyar ( talk | contribs ) 00:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)