Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/L.A.M.F./archive1

L.A.M.F.[edit]

Self-nomination. What was going to be a little bit of expansion and cleanup ended up being a good two hours plus of major expansion on this article. Not bad if I do say so myself, but I'll put my ego in check and see if anyone else says so. ;) --Cjmarsicano 07:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Object This article has certainly become better through the efforts of Cjmarsicano (talk · contribs), but I think it should under go a peer review before being considered for FA. There are only two references for the entire article. There are several critical POV statements that would be fine with citations, such as "The original vinyl release of the album was notorious for its lackluster sound." Also, the article does not discuss the social impact of album or how well it sold. For some ideas on good album articles, take a look at Smile, a featured article about the Brian Wilson article. -Scm83x 10:34, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I think I'll put it through peer review first. Thanks. It was late when I decided to do the nomination and my pride got the better of me. --Cjmarsicano 13:56, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Whilst it is true that criteria have been met for inclusion in the Wikipedia project,the heavy commercial bias of this subject matter remains. We may well be validating more than popular ephemera with this article, as it could be construed as advertising. I feel it is necessary for this point to be made, if not directly addressed. --HasBeen 09:14, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Response: Then I'm going to directly address it. To be honest, I don't see how you construe the article as a glorified advertisement. What did I do to get that accusation thrown my way? Mention what record label currently holds the master rights to the album? Mentioning which version is in print? These are facts relevant to the topic at hand. I wrote this article, and every article I've contributed to Wikipedia, in as NPOV a manner as possible. Conclusion: "Heavy commercial bias," my ass. --Cjmarsicano 13:47, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've added my thoughts on the article to the to the Peer Review page, but I wanted to chime in to agree with Cjmarsicano. The mere fact that this article acknowledges the existence of a commercial product does not make it advertising. I agree with HasBeen that we should make an effort to eliminate advertising on wikipedia, but IMO this article does not qualify as an advertisement. The Catfish 07:27, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The subject matter may be misconstrued as product placement. The article itself is well written. --HasBeen 08:18, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By that token, every entry about an album on Wikipedia could be an advert. -- CJ Marsicano 16:07, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An asute observation, and as good an argument for limiting their access to the front page as possible, even so far as to limit their inclusion as FAs, but perhaps that would take things too far?--HasBeen 10:40, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That would really, really be taking things way too far. At the risk of using a "pimply teenage hyperbole" (to quote A Hard Day's Night) at my age (38), it would also be very, very lame. Recorded albums are works of art. There are scores of articles on classic recordings on Wikipedia; the article on L.A.M.F. is just one of my proud contributions to that. -- CJ Marsicano 14:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree wholeheartedly that the album is a fine art-form, but their nature as a readily purchasable item does ring certain warning bells when they make roads to the front page. Again, this is a Comment rather than a minus vote. --HasBeen 10:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. For the record, the featuring of Smile has already set a precendent. :) And anyway, I'm sure that many of the articles in WP:ALBUMS have already inspired readers to check the albums out. That's not my main concern when writing album articles, but if a few people decide to check out an album I've written an entry about, that's cool with me. -- CJ Marsicano 16:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am now reassured that your motives are purely driven, and in no way represent deliberate product placement. However, without this sort of dialogue, the creeping horror of grass-roots marketing may slip past unaddressed. It is hellishly difficult to determine the real thing (a well written article with no ambitionds to shift units, such as this one) from a bid for a free advert. Thanks for arguing it out. I will take care not to add this comment again to other projects you are involved with. --HasBeen 09:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]